Court extends exemption benefit under section 5(3) as notification not canceled. Exemption must continue unless canceled.

The High Court held that the benefit of exemption under section 5(3) of the Act should be extended to the appellant as the notification was not canceled by the Government. The Court emphasized that unless a notification is canceled, the benefit of exemption must be given to the assessee. The Court also rejected the argument that the notification for exemption from additional surcharge was automatically canceled due to changes in the charging provision of the Act. The Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision in granting relief of exemption of additional surcharge and dismissed the revision with no costs awarded.

---

---

Issues:
1. Exemption claimed under section 5(3) of the Act
2. Levy of additional surcharge on declared goods
3. Correctness of the Tribunal's decision in granting relief of exemption of additional surcharge

Analysis:
1. The appellant, a dealer in hides and skins, declared a total and taxable turnover for the assessment year 1993-94. The assessing officer found discrepancies in the exemption claimed under section 5(3) of the Act and disallowed the claim for additional surcharge on declared goods. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the assessing officer's decision, stating that the exemption notification was not available during the relevant time. The Tribunal, considering a similar case in favor of the assessee, allowed the appeal. The High Court held that unless a notification is canceled by the Government, it remains in force, and the benefit of the exemption must be given to the assessee. As the notification was not canceled, the benefit should be extended to the appellant.

2. The Government Pleader argued that the charging provision of section 3A of the Act was deleted and reintroduced, leading to the automatic cancellation of any notification issued with reference to the deleted provision. However, the notification granting exemption from additional surcharge was not canceled by the Government. The High Court emphasized that unless the Government cancels a notification, the benefit of the exemption must be given to the assessee. The Court rejected the argument that the notification was qualified with reference to a specific area, stating that the benefit of the exemption should be extended unless canceled by the Government through a legal process.

3. The only issue raised in this revision was the correctness of the Tribunal's decision in granting relief of exemption of additional surcharge. The High Court found no illegality or irregularity in the Tribunal's order and dismissed the revision, affirming that the benefit of the exemption notification should be extended to the assessee unless canceled by the Government. The Court concluded that the Tribunal's decision was in accordance with the law, and no costs were awarded in this matter.

---