9911796707
TMI Blog1964 (11) TMI 99X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x under section 10(1) read with entry 23 of Schedule I of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, inasmuch as it had paid duty under the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955, on the medicinal preparations sold by it. This claim for exemption was rejected by the Sales Tax Officer, Raipur. Against these orders of assessments, the petitioner has filed appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax. According to the petitioner, those appeals are still pending and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has threatened to dismiss those appeals summarily in case it fails to deposit the amount of tax and penalty it has been directed to by the appellate authority. 4.. Under section 6, read with entry 32 of Schedule II, of the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, exemption from sales tax was granted on"Goods on which duty is or may be levied under the Central Provinces and Berar Excise Act, 1915 (II of 1915), or the Central Provinces and Berar Prohibition Act, 1938 (VII of 1938), or the Opium Act, 1878 (I of 1878)." So also, by section 10(1), read with entry 23 of Schedule I, of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, exemption from sales tax ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the basis of duty paid on alcohol used as an ingredient in the manufacture of medicinal preparations, it must be noted that the tax imposed on the petitioner under the Sales Tax Acts of 1947 and 1958 is on the sale transactions of medicinal preparations and not on any transaction of sale or purchase of alcohol as such, and the duty that was imposed under the C.P. and Berar Rectified Spirit Rules, 1942, made under the Prohibition Act of 1938 was on alcohol supplied to the applicant for the manufacture of medicinal preparations and not on medicinal preparations containing alcohol. That being so, even if it is taken that after the coming into force of the Act of 1955 the duty which the petitioner paid on alcohol used by it as an ingredient in the manufacture of medicinal preparations was paid under the Act of 1955, and not under the C.P. and Berar Prohibition Act, 1938, and further even if it be assumed for the sake of argument that in regard to the payment of duty on alcohol the reference to the Prohibition Act of 1938 in the aforesaid entries should be construed by virtue of section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, as referring to the Act of 1955, still the petitioner, on the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955, in place of the C.P. and Berar Prohibition Act of 1938, the petitioner would become entitled to claim exemption from sales tax on those goods to which no exemption was at all granted by the entries referred to earlier of the Sales Tax Acts of 1947 and 1958. In our opinion, the petitioner's claim for exemption from sales tax on its turnover of medicinal preparations based on the C.P. and Berar Prohibition Act of 1938 with the substituted references to the Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1955, is altogether untenable. 7.. The further argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the provision in the C.P. and Berar Excise Act. 1915, imposing a duty on medicinal preparations containing alcohol was repealed and re-enacted by the Act of 1955 and, therefore, the references to the Excise Act of 1915 in the aforesaid entries should be read as references to the Act of 1955 is equally unsound. The argument has obviously been advanced to got rid of the effect of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Alembic Distributors Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax(1), where it has been held that after the enactm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty was terminated and the excise duty that was imposed on medicinal preparations containing alcohol was a duty levied and imposed by the Central Government. There is a clear distinction between an excise duty levied by the State and an excise duty levied by the Central Government, and a provision taking away the State's right to levy the duty and giving it to the Central Government cannot in any sense be regarded as ''re-enactment" within the meaning of section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, of the provision in the State Act giving to the State the right to levy excise duty on medicinal preparations containing alcohol. If the Act of 1955 had authorised the State Government to levy excise duty on medicinal preparations containing alcohol, then the matter would have been different and it could be said that the duty imposed under the Act of 1955 was in exactly the same way as before under the Excise Act of 1915. It is also important to note that the exemption granted by the entries of the Sales Tax Acts referred to earlier, to medicinal preparations containing alcohol proceeded on the basis that as the preparations had already been subjected to duty under the Excise Act of 1915 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
