The additional sales tax and surcharge levied under the Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1970 and the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971 are leviable in respect of turnover not covered by "C" and "D" forms and assessable to tax under the Central Act.

RAJU, J.

The above batch of writ petitions involve the interpretation of the scope of section 8(2-A) and section 8(2)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as "the Central Act" and more particularly as to whether the additional sales tax and surcharge levied under the Tamil Nadu Additional Sales Tax Act, 1970 (Act 14 of 1970) and the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax (Surcharge) Act, 1971 (Act 24 of 1971) hereinafter referred to as "the Additional Sales Tax Act" and "the Surcharge Act" respectively are attracted and become leviable in respect of turnover not covered by "C" and "D" forms and assessable to tax under the Central Act. The majority of the petitioners have come up before this Court challenging the show cause notice issued by the concerned assessing officers to bring to assessment, either afresh or by way of reassessment the turnover relating to inter-State sales not covered by the "C" or "D" forms at the rates inclusive of additional sales tax and surcharge in addition to the rates of such taxation that was and has to be levied in the light of the Central Act read with the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the "local sales tax law". Some of the writ petitions have been filed challenging the final orders of assessment on the above basis, contending that the normal statutory remedies provided are neither effective nor appropriate.

2. The petitioners are all assessees under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and dealers in different commodities in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. In the majority of cases filed, the petitioners were earlier assessed finally to tax under the Central Act. They had different categories of turnover and in these cases, their concern mainly is with reference to the turnover not covered by proper or valid "C" or "D" forms and is, therefore, subject to the general rate to be determined applying section 8(2)(b) of the Central Act. The grievance of the petitioners is that the Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madras, has clarified as late as November, 1989, that there is no liability of surcharge and additional tax in respect of inter-State sales, but yet on account of a clarification said to have been issued by the Government of India that wherever there is provision for levy of additional sales tax and surcharge, they also have to be determined and included in arriving at the rate of tax to be calculated in terms of section 8(2)(b) of the Central Act, the office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madras, issued revised instructions to include both the additional tax and surcharge leviable on the sale or purchase of goods under the State Act for determining the rate of Central sales tax and proceeded with reassessment/revision of assessment even by reopening past assessments. In the light of the said revised instructions, the respective assessing authorities have either issued notices or passed final orders after due notice and opportunity by revising the rate of taxation in respect of turnover not covered by valid "C" and "D" forms by adding to the rate of tax, the additional tax as well as the surcharge leviable.

3. Mr. C. Natarajan, one of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, spearheaded the challenge and contended that the additional tax and surcharge leviable under the respective enactments are levies for special categories of dealers or places of transaction and consequently they ceased to be a tax to which the goods are subjected to generally. It is the contention of the learned counsel that having regard to the language of section 8(2-A) of the Central Act with particular reference to the words "tax generally", the levy under Additional Sales Tax Act or Surcharge Act cannot be said to be such "tax generally" levied and, therefore, there is no scope for including the same in the rate of tax leviable under the Central Act. The learned counsel also contended that the additional sales