Civil court jurisdiction excluded by complete tax remedy scheme; sales tax collections remained part of taxable turnover.

A taxing statute that creates a complete machinery for assessment, collection, appeal, revision and refund excludes civil court jurisdiction by necessary implication, so a refund suit is not maintainable where the special assessment scheme governs the dispute. Sales tax collected by the dealer was also included in taxable turnover for the relevant assessment period because the Act then in force did not expressly exclude such collections, and the later amendment excluding them operated only prospectively from 1 April 1951. The suit therefore failed and the collections remained assessable for that period.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the civil court's jurisdiction to entertain a suit for refund of sales tax was excluded under the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1950. (ii) Whether sales tax collected by the dealer was includible in taxable turnover for the assessment period ending 31 March 1951.

Issue (i): Whether the civil court's jurisdiction to entertain a suit for refund of sales tax was excluded under the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Act, 1950.

Analysis: The Act provided a complete machinery for levy, assessment, collection, appeal, revision, and refund, and empowered the assessing authorities to decide questions of fact and law arising in assessment proceedings. Jurisdiction of civil courts can be excluded not only by express words but also by necessary implication where a special statute creates rights and liabilities and sets up an exclusive adjudicatory scheme. The later insertion of section 23A did not assist the respondents, because the suit had already been instituted before that provision was brought into force.

Conclusion: The civil court's jurisdiction was excluded by the scheme of the Act, and the suit for refund was not maintainable. The finding is against the assessee and in favour of Revenue.

Issue (ii): Whether sales tax collected by the dealer was includible in taxable turnover for the assessment period ending 31 March 1951.

Analysis: Under section 2(k), turnover meant the aggregate amount for which goods were sold, and there was no express provision in the Act then in force excluding sales tax collections from that aggregate. Rule 7(1) was amended only with effect from 1 April 1951 to exclude amounts of sales tax collected by the dealer, and that amendment was not in force for the relevant assessment period. The amendment was therefore substantive and not merely clarificatory.

Conclusion: Sales tax collected by the dealer was properly included in taxable turnover for the relevant period. The finding is against the assessee and in favour of Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The statutory assessment and collection mechanism was held to bar the refund suit, and the disputed sales tax collections were held liable to be included in the taxable turnover for the period in question.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing statute provides a complete and exclusive machinery for assessment, appeal, revision, collection, and refund, civil court jurisdiction is excluded by necessary implication, and sales tax collections form part of turnover unless the statute expressly provides their exclusion.

---