TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (2) TMI 445
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tifications Nos. F.5 (16)FD/CT/69-13 and 14 dated April 1, 1969 issued under section 4(2) of the Act (printed at [1969] 24 STC Statutes 19). The Notification No. 14 relating to "namkins" was withdrawn vide Notification No. F.5(24) FD/CT/72-11 dated April 26, 1972 (printed at [1972] 30 STC Statutes 16). The Notification No. 13 relating to "desi sweetmeats" was also withdrawn by issuing a corrigendum to the said notification dated April 26, 1972 vide Notification dated October 5, 1972 (printed at serial No. 263 of the Vol. II of Law of Sales & Purchase tax in Rajasthan by Jai Kumar jain). The business premises of the assesseeappellant was surveyed on January 18, 1973, October 30, 1974 and November 11, 1974 and account books were seized. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rawn by Notification dated April 26, 1972. By issuing a corrigendum to this Notification dated April 26, 1972 on October 5, 1972, exemption granted to the "desi sweetmeats" was purported to be withdrawn. He contended that the Notification dated October 5, 1972 was not a corrigendum to the Notification dated April 26, 1972, it was an independent notification and it could not have retrospective effect as section 4 of the Act, as it then stood, did not empower the State Government to issue a notification or to rescind it with retrospective effect. He relied upon [1970] 75 ITR 174 (SC); AIR 1970 SC 385 (Income-tax Officer v. M.C. Ponnoose) and [1978] 42 STC 356 (Kar) (Ananda Soap Factory v. State of Karnataka). He lastly contended that the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion (2) of section 4 of the Act runs as under: "Where the State Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient in the public interest so to do, the State Government may, by notification in the official Gazette exempt, whether prospectively or retrospectively from tax the sale or purchase of any goods or class of goods or any person or class of persons on such conditions and on payment of such fee as may be specified in the notification." The words "whether prospectively or retrospectively" were added by the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1976. Admittedly, the corrigendum Notification dated October 5, 1972 was issued prior to this amendment of the section 4(2) of the Act. By it, the exemption granted to the "desi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In any view of the matter, it cannot be said that it was a corrigendum to the previous Notification dated April 26, 1972. Two notifications dealt with two different commodities, number 13 dealt with "desi sweetmeats" and number 14 dealt with "namkins". There was no question of any correction to the notification relating to "namkins". These two commodities namely "desi sweetmeats" and "namkins" were exempted through two different notifications. The notification relating to "namkins" was rescinded by Notification dated April 26, 1972. Similar Notification could be issued on this date rescinding notification relating to the "desi sweetmeats" and admittedly this was not done. By issuing Notification dated October 5, 1972, the exemption from th....