Sales tax exemption on notified goods requires purchase from a registered dealer and prescribed certificate; prior tax payment alone is insufficient.

Exemption from sales tax on notified goods under section 5(1-A) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 depended on strict compliance with the notification and Form ST XXII-A. The proviso was construed to require the dealer claiming exemption to have purchased the goods from a registered dealer and to furnish the prescribed certificate in that capacity. A certificate tracing the goods to an earlier registered manufacturer was insufficient where the immediate purchase was from unregistered dealers. The contention that the goods could be taxed only once was rejected because the exemption was conditional and unregistered dealers were not treated like registered dealers; the sales were therefore liable to tax at the first stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether sales tax exemption under section 5(1-A) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, read with the notification and form ST XXII-A, was available when the goods were purchased from unregistered dealers but certificates were produced from the original registered manufacturer.

Analysis: Section 5(1-A) permitted levy at the first stage of sale of notified goods and protected subsequent sales from tax only when the selling dealer satisfied the prescribed conditions. The notification fixed the first stage according to the class of dealer, and the prescribed form ST XXII-A required a certificate from the registered dealer from whom the goods were purchased. The proviso was read as insisting that the dealer claiming exemption must itself have purchased the goods from a registered dealer and must furnish the prescribed certificate in that capacity. A certificate tracing the goods to an earlier registered manufacturer did not satisfy the statutory requirement when the immediate purchase was from unregistered dealers. The contention that the goods could be taxed only once was rejected because the statute made exemption conditional and did not place unregistered dealers on the same footing as registered dealers.

Conclusion: The exemption was not available to the petitioner, and the sales made by it were liable to tax as the first stage of sale under the notification.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed on the proper construction of section 5(1-A) and the notification governing notified goods, and the assessment was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: A dealer claiming exemption from sales tax on notified goods under section 5(1-A) must strictly satisfy the statutory condition of purchasing from a registered dealer and furnishing the prescribed certificate; a purchase from an unregistered dealer does not qualify for the exemption even if the goods had earlier suffered tax.

---