VEERASWAMI, J.

The matter relates to the assessment year 1961-62 and to a turnover of Rs. 71, 225.21. According to the assessee, who is the petitioner, this turnover consisted of sales of component parts in respect of which he filed declaration in Form XVII at the time of check of accounts and before the final order of assessment was made. He claimed that the sales were chargeable to tax at the concessional rate of one per cent. under section 3(3) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The revenue as well as the Tribunal declined to allow the claim and they have agreed in charging the turnover at six per cent.

The only point, therefore, is whether the turnover was chargeable only as claimed by the petitioner. The view of the revenue as well as the Tribunal was that inasmuch as the declarations in Form XVII were not attached to the monthly returns submitted by the petitioner, they had to be ignored with the result that section 3(3) would be inapplicable. This view is clearly wrong. Section 3(3) reads :

"Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of sub-section (2), the tax payable by a dealer in respect of any sale of goods mentioned in the First Schedule by such dealer to another for use by the latter as component part of any other goods mentioned in that Schedule, which he intends to manufacture inside the State for sale shall be at the rate of only one per cent. on the turnover relating to such sale." *

The sub-section has proviso which is material for purposes of this case and it is as follows :

"Provided that the provisions of this sub-section shall not apply to any sale unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes to the assessing authority in the prescribed manner a declaration duly filled in and signed by the dealer to whom the goods are sold containing the prescribed particulars in a prescribed form obtained from the prescribed authority."

Section 53 contains the rule-making authority. Sub-section (1) is in the usual form, namely, that the Government may make rules to carry out the purposes of the Act. Clause (i) of sub-section (2) confers rule-making power in respect of the form and the particulars to be contained in any declaration to be given under the Act, the authority from whom, the conditions subject to which and the fees subject to payment of which any form of declaration prescribed under sub-section (3) of section 3 may be obtained, the manner in which the form shall be kept in custody and records relating thereto maintained, the manner in which any such form may be used and any such declaration may be furnished. In exercise of this the State Government framed rule 22 of the Madras General Sales Tax Rules, 1959. This rule states that the declaration for the purpose of section 3(3) shall be in Form XVII. Sub-rule (5) of this rule which is relevant is this :

"A dealer who claims that a sale is liable to tax under sub-section (3) of section 3 shall attach to his return of turnover in which that sale is included the portion marked 'original' of the declaration received by him from the purchasing dealer and shall also produce for inspection the portion of it marked 'duplicate' if the assessing authority, in his discretion, directs him so to do." *

The petitioner in this case opted under rule 18 of the Madras General Sales Tax Rules to file monthly returns. Under that rule the dealer shall submit the monthly returns on or before the 25th day of every month in Form A-2. It is not disputed that the declarations in the prescribed form were not attached to the monthly returns as and when they were filed by the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that the declarations in the required form with full particulars were produced at the time of the check of accounts and before the final order of assessment was made. The question, as we mentioned, is whether on the ground that they were not attached to the monthly returns, the petitioner could be denied the benefit of section 3(3). That point is now covered b