Rice bran exemption under sales tax law denied where it was not declared goods and the notification covered only paddy.

Rice bran was held not to qualify for exemption under section 4-B(1)(a-1) because the relief depended on two conditions: the commodity had to be declared goods under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and a State Government notification had to grant exemption to the first purchaser. Although rice bran was notified for tax purposes under section 3-D, it was treated as a distinct commercial commodity and not as declared goods, since section 14 covers paddy and rice but not rice bran. The notification relied on applied to paddy and did not extend exemption to rice bran, so the exemption claim failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether rice bran was entitled to exemption under section 4-B(1)(a-1) on the footing that it was declared goods under section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and whether the requisite State Government notification granting relief existed.

Analysis: The relief under section 4-B(1)(a-1) was held to depend on two conditions: the commodity must be declared goods liable to tax under section 3-D, and the State Government must issue a notification granting exemption to the first purchaser. Rice bran, though notified for tax purposes under section 3-D, was held not to be a declared commodity because section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 includes paddy and rice but not rice bran. The commodity was treated as a distinct commercial article from rice. The Court further held that the notification relied upon related to paddy and did not extend exemption to rice bran.

Conclusion: Rice bran was not eligible for exemption under section 4-B(1)(a-1), and the Tribunal's view was unsustainable. The revision was allowed and the order of the appellate authority was restored.

---