Alternative remedy available under the Act itself.

This is an application for issuing a writ of prohibition directing the respondent to forbear from assessing the petitioner for sales tax for 1950-51, The petitioner is a merchant trading in bullion and specie at Ettayapuram Naduveerapatti in Tirunelveli district. When the Madras General gales Tax Act was passed in 1939 bullion and specie were exempt from taxation. In 1947, section 5 of the old Act was substituted by the Madras General Sales Tax Amendment Act, 1947 (Madras Act XXV of 1947). Under that section the sale of bullion and specie shall be liable to tax only at a single point in the series of sales by successive dealers as may be prescribed and only at the rate of one-fourth of one per cent. of the turnover at that point. In exercise of the powers conferred on the Provincial Government by section 19 of the Act, rules were made for licensing the persons engaged in the sale of goods and the imposing of conditions in respect of the same or purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Act and the fee for licences. Rule 5(1)(d) and (f) of the Madras General Sales Tax Rules, 1939, requires that every person who deals in bullion and specie should submit an application in form 1 for a licence in respect of each of his places of businesses, and rule 6(1) says that every licence shall cover one place of business only and rule 6(1-A) provides that in addition to the licensee’s place of business, the shandies where he prosecuted his business may also be entered in the same licence. Under rule 7 the benefit of sections 5 and 8 can be claimed only for the transactions carried on during the period covered by the licence. The petitioner took out a licence for the place of his business, namely, Ettayapuram Naduveerapatti. In his return for 1949-50 he had shown not only the sales in the town in respect of which he has taken a licence, but also the sales effected by him in other places. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer at Kovilpatti raised the objection that the sales outside the place of business specified in the licence were liable to be assessed at 3 pies rate on every rupee and accordingly assessed the petitioner for the year 1949-50. The petitioner preferred an appeal to the Commercial Tax Officer, Tirunelveli, but that appeal was dismissed. Against that he preferred an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. But it is represented to me that the appeal is still pending. Meanwhile the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer issued a notice dated 16th February, 1951, proposing to assess the sale turnover of Rs. 29,093-1-9 for 1950-51 in Madura, Tirunelveli and Kovilpatti, at the enhanced rate of 3 pies on every rupee. The petitioner apprehends that his objections would be overruled. He therefore filed the aforesaid application to prohibit the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer from assessing the petitioner for sales tax for 1950-51.

The learned counsel for the petitioner raised before me two points:

1. The villages or towns where the petitioner casually sold the bullion are not places of business within the meaning of rule 5(d) and (f) of the Madras General Sales Tax Rules, 1939.

2. The amended rule defining the place of business is not retrospective in operation.

Learned Government Pleader, apart from supporting the view of the salestax authorities, contended that the petitioner has an adequate remedy under the Act itself and therefore this writ will not issue. As I am accepting the preliminary objection raised by the respondent, it is not necessary to express my view on the questions raised by the petitioner. The relevant provisions of the Madras General Sales Tax Act (IX of 1939) as amended by later amending Acts in so far as they are relevant to the preliminary objection raised run as follows:

Section 9.(l) Every dealer whose turnover is ten thousand rupees or more in a year shall submit such return or returns of his turnover, in such manner, and within such periods as may be specified in the rules made under sub-section (2) of section 3.

S