Single-point sales tax on tea bars a second levy after repacking, and trade associations had standing to challenge it.

Under a single-point sales tax scheme, tea taxed at the first point of sale could not be subjected to a second levy merely because it was repacked into smaller packets, since repacking did not alter its essential commercial identity. The Tribunal held that the relevant provisions contemplated tax only once on goods already brought to tax, and that no set-off was available unless expressly authorised by law. It also held that petitions by trade associations and dealers were maintainable because a person aggrieved could invoke the Tribunal's jurisdiction, even if not a party to the original clarification proceedings.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the petitions were maintainable before the Tribunal at the instance of trade associations and dealers who were not parties to the proceedings before the Additional Commissioner; and (ii) whether loose tea purchased in bulk and taxed at 4% could be subjected again to tax at 10% when repacked and resold in smaller packets, and whether any set-off was permissible.

Issue (i): whether the petitions were maintainable before the Tribunal at the instance of trade associations and dealers who were not parties to the proceedings before the Additional Commissioner.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that the extraordinary jurisdiction under section 8 of the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Act, 1995 could be invoked by any person aggrieved, and not merely by a dealer. The trade associations represented the interests of the tea trade, the issue involved substantial questions of law concerning the interpretation of the sales tax enactments and rules, and the petitioners were not required to exhaust the appellate remedy available to a dealer under the later Act when they were not parties to the original clarification proceedings.

Conclusion: The petitions were maintainable and the petitioners had locus standi to invoke the Tribunal's jurisdiction.

Issue (ii): whether loose tea purchased in bulk and taxed at 4% could be subjected again to tax at 10% when repacked and resold in smaller packets, and whether any set-off was permissible.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under section 5 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 and the corresponding provisions of the 1994 Act, read with rule 15 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, contemplated single-point levy at the first point of sale in a series of sales by successive dealers. The definition of taxable turnover also excluded goods already subjected to tax. Tea remained the same commodity notwithstanding repacking, because packing did not change its essential character or create a commercially distinct product. On that footing, the same tea could not be taxed twice merely because of the packet size. The Tribunal also held that no set-off could be claimed unless the law expressly provided for it.

Conclusion: Tea taxed at 4% as loose tea in bulk packages at the first point of sale was not liable to be taxed again at 10% upon repacking and resale in smaller packets; the impugned order allowing double levy was unsustainable and set aside.

Final Conclusion: The decision affirms single-point taxation for tea under the relevant notification and rejects any second levy on the same commodity solely because it was repacked into smaller packets.

Ratio Decidendi: Under a single-point sales tax scheme, goods that retain their commercial identity cannot be subjected to a second levy merely because of repacking or a change in packet size, unless the statute clearly authorises such double taxation.

---