The true and proper construction of sections 2(h) and 15(a) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939, will determine the contention raised regarding the guilt or innocence of the petitioner.

The essential facts cannot be disputed and shortly stated they are that the petitioner who is a dealer in silver wares and gold jewels in Kumbakonam Town and an assessee under the General Sales Tax Act, furnished a return on the 15th April 1946 Ex. P-1, in Form ‘A’ for the year 1945-1946 which admittedly did not include the value of 15,322-1/8 tolas weight of silver relating to the silver articles sold by him. The justification for the non-inclusion of the value of this weight of silver according to the petitioner, is the practice followed by him to sell! the articles, not for proper money consideration but only after getting back the equivalent weight of silver from the customers, for the precise quantity of the silver utilised in the manufacture of the article or articles. I think it can be taken as proved that when the petitioner gave a finished silver article to a customer, he took back the equivalent weight of silver as well as the actual manufacturing charges in cash. It was only t