Special charging provisions override optional compounding where a dealer falls within the Central Sales Tax-based levy scheme.

Section 7's optional compounded levy applies only to dealers assessable under the general charging scheme in section 3 and within the prescribed turnover range. Section 5 operates as a special charging provision for dealers registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, and its non obstante clause, together with the words "whatever be the quantum of his turnover," excludes such dealers from the section 3 scheme. The rates referred to in section 5 are applied by that provision itself, with section 3 used only to identify the class of goods. A dealer liable under section 5 therefore cannot claim compounding under section 7.

---

---

Issues: Whether a dealer registered under the Central Sales Tax Act and assessed under section 5 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act could claim the benefit of compounded taxation under section 7 of that Act instead of the special levy under section 5.

Analysis: Section 3(1) was the general charging provision, while section 7 conferred only an optional compounded levy on dealers whose turnover fell within the prescribed range and who would otherwise be assessable under section 3. Section 5, however, was a special charging provision for dealers registered under the Central Sales Tax Act. Its non obstante clause and the words "whatever be the quantum of his turnover" excluded such dealers from the minimum exemption attached to section 3 and took their case out of the scheme of section 3. The rates mentioned in section 5 were applied by that provision itself, and the reference to the rates in section 3 was only for identifying the class of goods.

Conclusion: The dealer was not entitled to claim assessment at the compounded rates under section 7, because his liability arose under section 5.

Final Conclusion: The special levy under section 5 prevailed over the optional compounded scheme under section 7 for a dealer registered under the Central Sales Tax Act, and the challenge to the Tribunal's view failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special charging provision with a non obstante clause governs a class of dealers, the general optional compounding provision applicable under the main charging section cannot be invoked to displace that special levy.

---