Civil court jurisdiction remained open for sales tax recovery suits where the unamended statute had no express bar.

Civil suits for recovery of amounts collected as sales tax were maintainable under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125, because the unamended statute contained no express provision barring civil court jurisdiction and no necessary implication excluding it. Section 23-A, which later excluded suits to set aside or modify assessments, was introduced only by the 1955 amendment and did not apply to the earlier collections. The principle applied was that exclusion of civil jurisdiction cannot be readily inferred and must be shown by clear statutory language or unavoidable implication; on that basis, the suits were upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether civil suits for recovery of amounts collected as sales tax were maintainable under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125, in the absence of any provision excluding the jurisdiction of civil courts at the relevant time.

Analysis: The Act, as it stood when the impugned collections were made, did not contain any provision barring suits. Section 23-A, which excluded suits to set aside or modify assessments, was introduced only by the 1955 amendment and came into force later. Exclusion of civil court jurisdiction is not to be readily inferred and must be either expressly stated or necessarily implied. On the terms of the unamended statute, there was no express bar and no necessary implication excluding the civil courts.

Conclusion: The suits were maintainable, and the appeals failed.

---