The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the word 'import' in the context of octroi duty and its application to goods brought within the local limits of a municipality, as well as the distinction between the notification of rates and the exemption notification.

Rajesh Balia, J.-Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioner has imported diesel generator sets within the Municipal limits of Gulabpura during the period in question. At the entry point, octroi was paid and later on as per the exemption notification, refund was claimed. The application for refund has not been decided.

2. The fact that the diesel generator sets were brought within the Municipal limits of Gulabpura is not in dispute. In the first instance, the petitioner has received one diesel generator set from Czechoslovakia on 23.09.1991. Despite exemption, on demand raised by the Municipality, the petitioner had deposited octroi duty on 12th December, 1991. The petitioner claimed exemption from the payment of octroi duty in view of the Notification dated 10th February, 1981 issued by the State Government in exercise of its power under Section 107(5) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 exempting import of power generating sets by the industries established within the local limits of the Municipalities and exempted the import of such generator sets brought within the local limits from the payment of the octroi duty leviable under Section 104 of the Act of 1959. However, it was not accepted at the check post and the petitioner paid the octroi duty under protest at the rate of 2% ad valorem on 12.1991 and lodged the claim for refund of the same.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner purchased another power generating set from M/s. Batltiboi & Co. Ltd. Branch Jaipur and the same was received within Municipal limits of Gulabpura directly from the manufacturer at Pondhichery. The petitioner, on being insisted, paid the octroi duty amounting to Rs. 70,000/- at the rate of 2% ad valorem on 06.04.1992 and by letter dated 07.04.1992 refund was claimed. In between reminders were also sent from time to time to decide the case. The same having not been decided, the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4092/1993 was filed.

4. In reply to the writ petition, respondents have taken two pleas, firstly, that the application for refund of octroi has been filed by the petitioner after expiry of the time limit and secondly, the Rate Notification dated 28.09.1984 has come into force after the Exemption Notification dated 10th February, 1981, therefore, the exemption notification automatically lapsed.

5. These two contentions raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents did not find favour with the learned Single Judge. The preliminary objections raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents have also not been countenanced by the learned Single Judge. The other objections raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents was not sustained by the learned Judge by finding that the rate notification did not result in lapse of the exemption notification because both were issued in exercise of different powers.

6. However, the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the word import in the Notification dated 10th February, 1981 means import from outside the geographical territories of the country and goods which have been brought within Municipality from a place within India cannot be considered and benefit of exemption cannot be extended. Accordingly, the writ petition was partly allowed by directing the respondents to refund Rs. 70,000/-of octroi duty deposited by the petitioner on the power generating set imported from Czechoslovakia but the refund claim in respect of generator received from Pondhichery in April, 1992 was rejected. The interpretation to expression import in the context of levy of octroi, as put by the learned Single Judge was not even the case of respondents.

7. Aggrieved with the aforesaid Judgment dated 8th July, 2002 this appeal has been preferred by the petitioner. Municipal Board, Gulabpura has not preferred any appeal.

8. The octroi duty is leviable in exercise of powers to enact law by the State Legislation in terms of subject matter referred to in Entry 52 of the II List of Schedule VII of the Constitut