9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (1) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent year 1958-59. In these petitions, the question of law for decision is whether the assessee is entitled to the exemption claimed by him. There is no dispute that the transactions with which we are concerned in these cases fall within the scope of section 5 of the Act. The controversy centers round the question whether they are exempted under section 8 read with entry 28 of the Fifth Schedule. It is needless to say that it is for the assessee to satisfactorily establish that he is entitled to the exemption claimed. This aspect of the case does not appear to have been borne in mind by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Entry 28 in the Fifth Schedule prior to its amendment on 1st January, 1959, read as follows: "Products of village industr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... column (2) of the following table, the number of units of production of each such industry shall not exceed the number specified in the corresponding entries of column (3) of the said Table, namely: * * *" Rule 25B reads: "(1) The Commissioner may on an application from a dealer who is a bona fide producer of products of any village industry referred to in serial No. 28 of the Fifth Schedule grant a certificate of recognition, if he is satisfied that he is a bona fide producer entitled to the exemption from tax: Provided that before granting any such certificate, the Commissioner may, if necessary, consult the Khadi and Village Industries Commission constituted under the Khadi and Village Industries Commission Act, 1956. (2) The cer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wami Rao, the learned counsel for the assessee, that as the State Government had not prescribed the maximum number of units of production or the persons employed as contemplated by the explanation to entry 28, his client could not have applied for obtaining the required recognition by the Commissioner, is not correct as seen earlier. On this aspect the learned counsel for the assessee tried to take support from the Full Bench decision of the Bombay High Court in Bhima Balu Madigar v. Basangouda Mamgouda Patil [1954] 56 Bom. L.R. 520. The ratio of that decision does not bear on the point under consideration. It deals with a different principle of law. The last contention advanced on behalf of the assessee, which contention has appealed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
