LexTHE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF MADRAS versus J. S. BASAPPA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
5 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 517 THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF MADRAS 1963 V. November 20 J. S. BASAPPA (A.K. SARKAR, M. HIDAYATULLAH AND J.C. SHAH, JJ.) Juri:Jdiction of Civil Courts-Statute conferring finality of orders of assessment-levy of tax without jurisdiction-If Civil Courts' jurisdiction excluded-Composit turnover-Transactions Validly taxed .and those not, severability of-Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1908 (IX ofl908), SS. 11, 12. -. The respondent, a groundnut-oil merchant filed three suits alleging that the property in some goods remained with him till the export of the goods to an extra-provincial point and till the payment of price after export, and sales tax was not demandable ; on these sales under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1933 .• The appellant contended that the sales were not inter-provincial sales, the suits were not maintainable in a civil court, the respondent had not exhausted his alternative remedies and the suits were barred by limitation under s. 18 of the Act. t .. Before the High Court an additional ground based upon the decision in M/s. Ram Narain Sons Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, [1955) 2 S.C.R. 483 was raised that the whole assess- II)ent was invalid because it included an illegal levy which.was not severable from the legal demand. Held: (i) Section 18 of the Sales Tax Act applies to suits for damages and compensation in respect of acts done under the Act. The period of limitation prescribed in that section does not a:pply to the kind of suits which were filed by the res- pondent . (ii) The jurisdiction of civil courts is not necessarily taken away when the decision of a tribunal is made final, because the civil court's jurisdiction to examine the order with reference to fundamental provisions of the statute, non-compliance with which would make the proceedings illegal and without jurisdiction, still remains unless the statute goes further and states either expressly or by necessary implications that the civil court's jurisdiction ia completely taken away. (iii) Applying the above principle the jurisdiction of the civil court was not taken away as the taxing of 'outside' sales was a matter wholly outside the jurisdiction of the taxing authorities. Firm of Il/uri Subhayya Chetty & Sons v. State of Andhra Pradesh, [1964) I S.C.R. 752 and Secretary of State represented 'I by tlie Collector of South Arco/ v. Mask &.Co. 67 I.A. 222. 518 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1964] 4. 1963 (iv) The entire assessment was void because it was not possible in the present case to separate from the composite turnover transac- The Provincial tion which were validly taxed from those which were not, in '" Government of mh uch as this pertaiphs. to thhe ddomain of tax officers and the courts M d ave no powers wit m t at omam. a ras M/s. Ram Narain Sons Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of v. Sales Tax, [1955) 2 S.C,R. 483 and Bennett.& White. (Calgary) Ltd. J.S. Basappa v. Municipal District of Sugar City, [1951) AC. 786. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 494-496 of 1962. Appeal from the judgment and decrees dated March 12, 1957, of the Andhra Pradesh High 'Court in A.S. Nos. 566 to 568 of 1961. "' A. V. Viswanatha Sastri, T. V.R. Tatachari and B.R.G.K. Achar, for the appellants. Bhimsankaram, Chander Kohli and E. Udayaratnam, • for respondents. November 20, 1963 .. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah J. HIDAYATULLAH, J.-This judgment will .dispose of Civil Appeals Nos. 494 to 496 of 1962. The State of Andhra Pradesh which now stands substituted for the Provincial Government of Madras is the appellant. The respondent is one J.S. Basappa, a groundnut-oil merchant of Kurnool who was selling ~ oil within the Province and also exported it to extra- Provincial points. These three appeals concern sales- tax for the years 1944-45, 1945-46 and 1946-47. They ~ arise out of three suits filed ·by Basappa against the "' Provincial Government of Madras now represented by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, the details of which are given below. For the year 1944-45, Basappa was assessed to sales-tax amounting to Rs. 12,983-2-2 of which, according to him, a sum of Rs. 1,594-1-5 onjy represen- ted sales within the Province. He claimed that the remaining sales took place outside the Province of Madras. He submitted that property in the goods re- mained with him till the export of the go
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.