Declared goods and inter-State sales: section 8(2A) is rate-regulating, and section 15 does not bar successive central sales tax

Section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act was treated as rate-regulating only, not as an independent charging provision, so it had to be read with section 8(1). On that construction, a dealer in declared goods could still fall within section 8(4)(a), and the proviso to section 9(1) continued to apply to a subsequent inter-State sale not covered by section 6(2). Section 15 was held to restrict State levy on declared goods and prevent multiple State-tax stages, but not to bar Central sales tax on successive inter-State sales. The disputed second inter-State sale was therefore taxable under the Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether section 8(2A) of the Central Sales Tax Act operates independently of section 8(1) so as to exclude the application of section 8(4) and the proviso to section 9(1) in respect of subsequent inter-State sales of declared goods; and whether section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act bars levy of Central sales tax on the second inter-State sale of declared goods after an earlier inter-State sale has been taxed.

Analysis: Section 8(2A) was held to regulate only the rate of tax and not to create a self-contained charging provision. It was treated as standing in the nature of a proviso to section 8(1), so that the liability and the conditions for concessional treatment had to be tested with reference to section 8(1) together with section 8(2A). On that construction, a dealer purchasing declared goods could still be a person who could have obtained the declaration contemplated by section 8(4)(a), and the proviso to section 9(1) remained applicable to a subsequent inter-State sale not covered by section 6(2).

Conclusion: Section 8(2A) does not operate independently, and the State from which the declaration could have been obtained was competent to assess the subsequent inter-State sale.

Issues: Whether section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act prevents levy of Central sales tax on the second inter-State sale of declared goods merely because the first inter-State sale was also taxed.

Analysis: Section 15 was held to restrict the levy of State tax on declared goods inside a State and to prevent tax at more than one stage under the State law. It was not construed as prohibiting levy of Central sales tax on more than one inter-State sale. Since both the first and the second transactions were taxable only under the Central Sales Tax Act and not under the State law, section 15 did not assist the petitioners.

Conclusion: Section 15 does not bar the levy of Central sales tax on the second inter-State sale.

Final Conclusion: The revision failed because the petitioners were liable to tax on the disputed second inter-State sales under the Central Sales Tax Act, and the statutory restrictions relied upon did not exclude the State's authority to assess and collect that tax.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 8(2A) is only rate-regulating and must be read with section 8(1), so a dealer entitled to the concessional scheme remains within section 8(4) and the proviso to section 9(1); section 15 restricts State levy on declared goods but does not prohibit multiple levies of Central sales tax on successive inter-State sales.

---