JUDGMENT

MOHAN, J.:—Leave granted.

2. Respondent No.1 is a private company. The respondent No. 2 is one of the directors-cum-shareholders.

3. The respondent purchases raw petroleum product. This product undergoes a process of manufacture in the factory. The ultimate commodity is Calcined Petroleum Coke (hereinafter referred to C.P.C.).

4. The respondent was subject to Sales Tax under Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as Finance Act) on the sale of C.P.C. as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The respondent stated that he missed to claim the adjustment of sales tax paid on the purchase of raw materials in the returns filed for the months of July and August,1990. The admitted tax due thereon was paid. In terms of Section 15(b) of the Act the respondent was entitled to a refund of sales tax paid under Finance Act. While filing the return for the month of September, 1990, the respondent did not pay the admitted tax of Rs.1,96,072/- but claimed refund of Rs.5,22,728/- which would be adjusted towards the admitted tax of 1,96,072/- and the balance of Rs.3,26,656/- was to be refunded on account of Bihar Sales Tax paid on the direct raw materials purchased for the months of July, August and September, 1990.

5. The application for refund was considered by the Assistant Commissioner and the same was dismissed since the claim for refund was against law. By order dated 8-11-1990, a penalty of Rs. 9,852.85 was imposed. Against this order, respondent preferred C. W. J. C. No. 7549/90.

6. Thereafter the respondent filed an application of refund of Rs. 19,22,340.12 for the period 1985-86 and Rs. 17,65,987.01 for the period 1986-87 under Section 15(b) of the Act read with Rule 35 of Bihar Sales Tax Rules, 1983. By notice dated 2-2-1991, the dealer was called upon to substantiate his claim. While that application was pending, he preferred C.W.J.C. No. 5813/91 before the High Court of Patna. While disposing of the writ petition, the High Court ordered on 5-9-1991 to consider the claim of refund and pass orders. On a consideration of the matter, the Joint Commissioner by order dated 16-12-1991 rejected the claim. Thereupon, the respondent preferred C.W.J.C. No. 415 of 1992.

7. Both C.W.J.C.Nos. 7549/90 and 415/92 came to be disposed of under a common order dated 10-4-1992 which is impugned in this civil appeal. Accordingly, the writ petitions were allowed.

8. The High Court set aside the findings of the Joint Commissioner in so far as he held that R.P.C. and C.P.C. though different commercial commodities, are declared goods under Section 14 (i-a) of the Act. The petition was liable to be rejected on the ground that raw petroleum coke has undergone a process of manufacture. On this line of reasoning, the High Court took the view that C.P.C. is a form of R.P.C. and, therefore, petitioners before it, would be entitled to exemption / reimbursement under Section 15(b) of the Act.

9. In this civil appeal befor us, the only contention urged by the State of Bihar is that no doubt the entry under Sec.14 (i-a) of the Act says coal, including coke in all its forms, but excluding charcoal. Having regard to the ruling of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Pyare Lal Malhotra, AIR 1976 SC 800, it should be held if R.P.C. has undergone a process of manufacture which ultimately results in C.P.C., it is a different product for the purpose of taxation. In the field of taxation, the State has wide choice in choosing the object of taxation. In this case, one added feature is that for the purpose of excise duty, R.P.C. is treated differently than C.P.C. both the products being subject to separate excise duty. Therefore, it is prayed that the judgment of the High Court be set aside and the order of the Joint Commissioner be restored.

10. In opposition to this, the learned counsel for the respondents urges that there is a wide distinction between entry under Section 14 (i-a) of the Central Sales Tax Act relating to coke