Refund entitlement on declared goods turns on the inter-State seller after retrospective amendment to sales tax law.

Rule 48(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules, 1949, as applicable to Haryana, was examined against section 12 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, and section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, on the question of who could claim refund of tax on declared goods sold in inter-State trade or commerce. The amended section 15(b), substituted retrospectively by Central Act 61 of 1972 with effect from 1 October 1958, shifted the refund obligation to the person making the inter-State sale, rather than the person who had originally paid local tax. Since the petitioners had not effected the inter-State sale, they were not entitled to the refund, and the impugned notices were valid.

---

---

Issues: Whether rule 48(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Rules, 1949, as applicable to Haryana, was ultra vires section 12 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, and section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, on the question of who was entitled to claim refund of tax on declared goods sold in inter-State trade or commerce.

Analysis: Section 12 of the Punjab Act provided for refund of tax paid on declared goods when those goods were sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, and the original language of section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act had been relied upon to contend that only the person who had paid the local tax could seek refund. However, by the amendment introduced through Central Act No. 61 of 1972, clause (b) of section 15 was substituted retrospectively with effect from 1 October 1958, and the refund obligation was recast so that reimbursement was to be made to the person making the inter-State sale. On the facts, the petitioners had not effected the inter-State sale, and the amended provision governed the claim.

Conclusion: Rule 48(2) was not ultra vires on the ground urged, and the petitioners were not entitled to claim the refund; the impugned notices were valid.

---