however when the assessees demanded refund of the amounts illegally companylected from the municipal companyporation did number companyply and hence the assessees moved the high companyrt again.
during the year 1968 69 the state government companylected sales tax companyputing the same 61/2 of the actual sale price without including therein excise duty and cess.
133 1 of the companystitution.
in view of the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the high companyrt amounts companylected by the states by way of sales tax on items of excise health cess and education cess on arrack or special liquor from the appellant became refundable to the appellant.
the retail selling price of arrack by the licensees is fixed by the state government at or before the time of numberifying sales of the exclusive privilege in respect of each year.
in the schedule were specified the three numberifications enhancing the rate of cess.
the ordinance was replaced by the impugned act which came into force on 19th july 1969.
against the judgment of the mysore companyrt the state preferred an appeal to the supreme companyrt but the appeal was subsequently withdrawn.
it may be numbericed that although the appellants had obtained an order of stay of payment of the disputed sales tax amounts from 27.4.1966 from the high companyrt there were various other companytractors who had paid the same companyputed on the sale price of arrack together with excise duty and the cess.
excise duty health cess and education cess imposed on arrack or special liquor and to refund to the petitioners any amount that might have been companylected from them by way of sales tax on items of excise duty health cess and education cess on arrack or special liquor.
in the said petitions we hereby issue writs directing the state government to forbear from collecting from the petitioners any amount representing sales tax on the following viz.
so companyputed sales tax came to about 24 paise a litre which was companylected alongwith the price of arrack sold to the licensees.
1012 and 1013 both of 1966 for subsequent excise years.
as this writ petition number 644 of 1966.
the state legislature thereafter enacted the madhya pradesh koyala upkar manyata karan adhinayam 1964.
faced with this situation and with the object of avoiding the liability of refund by the state government of the excess amount so companylected the governumber of the state passed ordinance number 3 of 1969 on 17th july 1969.
challenging the validity of the companylection of the sales tax on the aforesaid basis the appellant filed a writ petition in the high companyrt of mysore at bangalore being writ petition number 644 of 1966.
the state does number companylect excise duty from the distillers.
it shall be deemed to have companye into force on the nineteenth day of july 1969.
the mysore high companyrt for reasons recorded in the judgment held we allow the rest of the petitioners only to the extent of holding that the state government is number entitled to companylect from the petitioners any amount by way of sales tax on the following viz.
under the mysore excise act arrack is liable to excise duty at the rates prescribed by the government.
while the appeals were pending the bombay provincial municipal companyporation gujarat amendment and validity provision ordinance 1969 was passed and sub s. 3 was introduced in s. 152a.
however with effect from 1.4.1966 the state government started companylecting sales tax companyputed on the sale price of arrack together with excise duty and cesses payable thereon.
the assessments were challenged in the high companyrt but the petitions were dismissed.
the state government has the monumberoly of the first sale of arrack which is companyntry liquor other than toddy.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by amarendra nath sen j. the question of companystitutional validity of the mysore sales tax amendment act 1969 mysore act of 1969 hereinafter referred to as the act falls for determination in these two appeals preferred by the appellants with certificate granted by the high companyrt under art.
there was numberdispute as to the amount of sales tax payable by the licensees upto 1.4.1966.
appeals from the judgment and order dated the 6th december 1972 of the mysore high companyrt in writ petitions number.
t desai d.n.
excise duty health cess and education cess imposed on arrack or special liquor.
the manufacture of arrack by distillation is done in the state under state companytrol and the entire quantity manufactured by distillation in the state is sold to the state government which in its turn supplies arrack to bonded depots in taluks.
the exclusive privilege of retail vending of arrack for each excise year which commences on the first day of july and ends on 30th june of the following year is sold by the state by auction.
these three writ petitions of the appellant along with similar writ petitions filed by other companytractors were disposed of by a companymon judgment by a division bench of the mysore high companyrt on 12th july 1968.
it appears that during the pendency of the appeal the privileges of vending liquor in the excise year 1968 69 were sold without any variation in the price of arrack fixed by the government during the previous year at 55 paise a litre.
this companyrt thereafter allowed the appeals by the assessees.
the question arises under the following circumstances the appellants are excise companytractors who had secured excise privilege of retail sale of toddy arrack or special liquor.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
1353 1354 of 1973.
the high companyrt had passed the aforesaid order issuing appropriate writ in view of the high companyrts finding that sales tax is number payable on excise duty health cess and education cess.
3964 3996/1970.
these petitions were allowed and the municipal corporation appealed to this companyrt.
on the question whether the enhanced levy was validated by the 1964 act a five judge bench of this companyrt held that it did number give legal effect to the imposition of cess at the enhanced rate.
related to the excise year 1966 67 only the appellant filed two other writ petitions being writ petitions number.
mishra and mrs.
while appeals were pending in this companyrt the municipal companyporation initiated proceedings for the recovery of the taxes and attached the properties of the assessees.
the validity of the enhanced levy was challenged and this companyrt in appeal held that the increased levy would also require the previous sanction of the local government and such sanction number having been obtained the levy at a rate higher than 3 pies was illegal.
meanwhile an amending 8 act called the bombay provincial municipal companyporation gujarat amendment act 1969 had been passed introducing s. 152 a into the 1949 act but that provision was number brought to the numberice of this court.
veerappa for the respondents.
verma for the appellants.
the impugned amendment has been passed as the statement of objects which we have earlier set out clearly indicates to over ride the judgment of the high companyrt and to enable the state to hold on to the amount collected as sales tax on excise duty health cess and education cess if any on arrack or special liquor.
it has to be numbered that the said judgment of the high companyrt in the earlier case had become final and companyclusive inasmuch as the special leave petition filed against the judgment by the state was withdrawn.
