Central sales tax exemption requirements: State rules may add declaration particulars where they remain consistent with the Act and Central rules.

Rule 5A of the Kerala Central Sales Tax Rules was held to remain valid because it operated consistently with the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules in the same field. Section 6A places the burden on the dealer to prove transfer otherwise than by sale and permits prescribed declarations, while the statute also authorises both Central and State rule-making on declaration particulars. The State requirement for additional particulars did not conflict with the Central form F regime, and concurrent compliance was possible. No implied repeal or supersession arose, so the dealer had to furnish the particulars required by the State rule.

---

---

Issues: Whether rule 5A of the Central Sales Tax (Kerala) Rules, 1957 stood superseded or impliedly repealed by rule 12(5) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 so as to relieve the dealer from furnishing the particulars prescribed by the State rule for claiming exemption under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

Analysis: Section 6A places the burden of proving transfer otherwise than by sale on the dealer and contemplates a declaration with prescribed particulars. Under section 13(1), the Central Government may prescribe the form and particulars of declarations, while sections 13(3) and 13(4)(e) also empower the State Government to make rules for declarations under section 6A, so long as those rules are not inconsistent with the Act or the Central Rules. The two sets of rules operate in the same field by legislative design. The State rule requiring additional particulars does not conflict with the Central rule prescribing form F, and compliance with one does not require disobedience of the other. There was therefore no basis for implying repeal or supersession.

Conclusion: Rule 5A remained valid and enforceable, and the dealer was bound to furnish the particulars required by it. The challenge to the assessment orders failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute simultaneously confers rule-making power on the Central and State Governments in respect of the same declaration, a State rule requiring additional particulars is valid if it is consistent with the Act and the Central Rules, and there is no implied repeal absent repugnancy or impossibility of concurrent compliance.

---