Civil suit challenge to sales tax assessment barred, while 1950-51 levy remained valid under the continuance order.

A civil suit cannot be used to challenge a sales tax assessment made under a self-contained statute where the Act expressly bars suits to set aside or modify such assessments; the assessee must pursue the statutory remedies, and the civil court challenge was therefore not maintainable. A levy on sales for 1950-51 was also preserved by the Sales Tax Continuance Order, 1950 despite Article 286(2), because the relevant transactions fell within the protected transition period and remained lawful for that period. The challenge thus failed on both maintainability and merits, and the assessment stood upheld.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a civil suit challenging a sales tax assessment was barred by the Madras General Sales Tax Act. (ii) Whether the levy on sales relating to the period 1950-51 was saved by the Sales Tax Continuance Order, 1950 notwithstanding Article 286(2) of the Constitution of India.

Issue (i): Whether a civil suit challenging a sales tax assessment was barred by the Madras General Sales Tax Act.

Analysis: Civil court jurisdiction extends to all civil suits unless expressly or impliedly barred. The Act contained a specific provision excluding suits or proceedings to set aside or modify an assessment made under it. A challenge framed as illegality, ultra vires action, or want of merit in the assessment was still, in substance, a challenge to an assessment made under the statutory machinery. Where the statute provides a self-contained hierarchy of remedies, the assessee must pursue those remedies and cannot bypass them by approaching the civil court.

Conclusion: The civil suit was barred and the challenge to the assessment was not maintainable before the civil court.

Issue (ii): Whether the levy on sales relating to the period 1950-51 was saved by the Sales Tax Continuance Order, 1950 notwithstanding Article 286(2) of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: Sales that would otherwise attract the constitutional restriction on tax on inter-State or outside-State sales were protected during the relevant transition period by the President's Sales Tax Continuance Order, 1950. The levy continued to be lawful for the period covered by that order, and earlier decisions had upheld its operation up to 31st March, 1951. As the transactions in question related to 1950-51, the assessment was within the protected period.

Conclusion: The levy was saved by the Sales Tax Continuance Order, 1950 and was not invalid for the relevant period.

Final Conclusion: The assessee's challenge failed both on maintainability and on merits, and the assessment was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: A suit is barred where, in substance, it seeks to set aside or modify an assessment made under a self-contained tax statute, and a levy otherwise affected by Article 286(2) may remain valid for the period covered by a constitutionally authorised continuance order.

---