On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner affirmed the view of the Sales Tax Officer and dismissed the appeal.
288 of 1965.
The Sales Tax Officer took the view that as a result of the reorganisation of the States, the respondent became liable to pay tax for the above assessment period as he was doing business in the new State of Madhya Pradesh and companytinued to be a registered dealer.
21 of 1947 hereinafter called the Act .
3,000 was imposed on the respondent under Section 17 3 of the Act.
The present appeal is brought by special leave from the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated 27th April, 1966, in Miscellaneous Civil Case No.
By its judgment dated 27th April, 1966, the High Court answered the question in favour of the respondent holding that if the registered dealer carried on business in places number disclosed in its registration certificate, he would have to be treated as an unregistered dealer vis a vis those places, and, therefore, the respondent companyld number be treated as a registered dealer with respect to the area companyprised in the new State of Madhya Pradesh as numberplace of business from that area was specified in its certificate.
The respondent held a registration certificate under the C. P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 C. P. and Berar Act No.
Prior to 1st November, 1956, both Nagpur and Gondia were within the then State of Madhya Pradesh.
Thereafter, at the instance of the appellant the Board of Revenue referred the following question of law to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Whether a registered dealer, who had his head office at Nagpur, under the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, companytinued to be a registered dealer in Madhya Pradesh, formed on November 1, 1956, after the reorganisation of the States if his business was partly carried on in the area which went to Maharashtra State and partly in the area which formed part of the new Madhya Pradesh ?
Apart from Nagpur and Gondia, prior to 1st November, 1956, the respondent was also working the manganese mines in Wara Seoni and Chhindwara within the then Slate of Madhya Pradesh and was carrying on business at the said two places.
Before the formation of the new State of Madhya Pradesh on 1st November, 1956, the respondent was carrying on business at Nagpur styled as head office and main place of business and at Gondia styled as additional place of business .
The tax was assessed at Rs.
27,697.28 and a penalty of Rs.
The respondent took the matter in further appeal to the Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradeah, at Gwalior which by its order dated 15th April, 1964, held that the respondent companyld number be treated as a registered dealer in two States by virtue of the same registration certificate and if he had number obtained a certificate in the new State of Madhya Pradesh he should have been treated as a mere dealer and number as a registered dealer.
to 3rd July, 1958, under Section 19 4 and Section 17 3 of the Act read with Section 11 4 and Section 10 3 of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947.
Consequently, the Board of Revenue remanded the case to the Sales Tax Officer, Chhindwara, for a fresh assessment.
But in the registration certificate Wara Seoni and Chhindwara were number shown as additional places of business of the respondent.
The Sales Tax Officer, Chhindwara, assessed the respondent for the period 1st November, 1956.
In the registration certificate Nagpur was shown as the main place of business and Gondia as an additional place of business.
As a result of the reorganisation of States on 1st November, 1956, Nagpur was incorporated within the State of Bombay, The respondent became u registered dealer in the new State of Madhya Pradesh on 8th March, 1950.
Ramaswami, J. The respondent is a dealer in manganese ore having its head office at Nagpur.
