Prescribed form compliance and strict notification conditions under the Central Sales Tax Act determine concessional tax and exemption eligibility.

For concessional tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, furnishing a declaration in prescribed Form C was treated as sufficient even though the assessee filed the duplicate part rather than the original, because the statute did not require a particular detachable part and the defect was one of form, not substance. By contrast, exemption under a State notification issued under section 8(5) depended on strict fulfilment of the notification's express condition requiring a customs certificate in the prescribed form before assessment, and other evidence of export could not substitute for that requirement.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether filing the original part of declaration in form C was mandatory or directory for claiming concessional tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and whether filing the duplicate part instead amounted to sufficient compliance. (ii) Whether the requirement of furnishing a certificate from the customs authorities under the State exemption notification issued under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was mandatory, and whether the assessee could claim exemption on the basis of other proof of export.

Issue (i): Whether filing the original part of declaration in form C was mandatory or directory for claiming concessional tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and whether filing the duplicate part instead amounted to sufficient compliance.

Analysis: Form C under rule 12(1) consists of original, duplicate and counterfoil parts, each forming part of the prescribed form. Section 8(4) requires a declaration in the prescribed form to be furnished in the prescribed manner, but it does not specify that only the original part must be filed before the assessing authority. Since the duplicate part filed was otherwise identical and the declaration itself was furnished, the defect was treated as one of form rather than substance.

Conclusion: The requirement of filing the original part of form C was directory, not mandatory, and the assessee was entitled to the concessional rate of tax.

Issue (ii): Whether the requirement of furnishing a certificate from the customs authorities under the State exemption notification issued under section 8(5) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 was mandatory, and whether the assessee could claim exemption on the basis of other proof of export.

Analysis: Exemption under section 8(5)(b) operates only on fulfilment of the conditions stated in the notification. The notification in question expressly required a certificate from the customs department in the prescribed form before assessment. Filing of statements or a certificate from the purchaser could not substitute the condition specifically imposed by the notification.

Conclusion: The customs certificate requirement was mandatory, and the assessee was not entitled to the exemption without compliance with that condition.

Final Conclusion: The references were answered partly in favour of the assessee and partly in favour of the Revenue, with concessional tax allowed on the form C issue but exemption denied on the notification issue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute requires a declaration in a prescribed form but does not specify a particular detachable part of that form, filing another identical part may constitute sufficient compliance; however, where exemption is granted subject to an express condition in the notification, strict compliance with that condition is necessary.

---