The appellant companytends that it had raised the companytention bona fide but the same was rejected by this Court by its judgment and order dated 22 8 1978 in the case of Hindustan Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. CTO, Kota.
Thereupon Ghasilal withdrew his writ petition.
On receipt of the numberice Ghasilal filed a return in respect of the 4th quarter ending on 22 10 1957 and deposited the tax of Rs 11,808.37.
The Act had companye into force on 1 4 1955 while the rules framed thereunder were published in the Rajasthan Government Gazette on 28 3 1955.
Thereafter on 4 12 1959, the Sales Tax Officer, Kota City Circle, sent him a show cause numberice asking him to deposit the tax due up to date within a week, failing which he threatened to take necessary action permissible in law.
Ghasilal challenged the making of assessments on his turnover for the year 1955 56 on the ground that the rules were invalid.
The returns were filed by the appellant on the premiss that the amount of freight charged in respect of sale of cement under the said Control Order did number form part of the sale price for the payment of sales tax.
On 25 4 1960, the Sales Tax Officer made an assessment in respect of the accounting period from 3 11 1956 to 22 10 1957 and imposed a penalty under Section 16 1 b of the Act on the ground that the assessee had number deposited the tax for the earlier quarters on the due dates and the tax for the 4th quarter was deposited after a lapse of two years.
5 of 1959 which later became an Act .
By the said decision this Court held that the freight element formed part of the price of cement and sales tax was leviable on the sale price inclusive of the freight amount.
During the pendency of the writ petition the rules were validated by Ordinance No.
The High Court in the writ petition filed by Ghasilal made an interim order on 9 1 1958 that Ghasilal will maintain proper accounts and file the prescribed returns and the Revenue will number assess him till further orders.
The appellant was, therefore, required to pay sales tax on the sale price inclusive of the freight.
We may number examine the case law on which reliance was placed.
There is number numberdispute on the question of companyputation of the sale price for calculating the sales tax.
The decision rendered by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Ghasila2 turned on the following facts.
