The court held that an assessee aggrieved by an action taken by a tax officer under a taxing statute should first exhaust the remedies provided under the statute before approaching the court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Kapur, J.

1. These are four rules Issued against the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab, and another to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue against them. The petitioners in all these applications are different but the point raised is the same. The petitions are Writ Applications (Civil) Nos. 135 of 1953, 20 of 1953, 36 Of 1953 and 390 Of 1952.

2. The facts disclosed in each one of the petitions are that the petitioners are manufacturers of edible oils and are using electric power for crushing of oil from different kinds of seeds--sarson, toria & til. The petitioners in the various cases applied under Section 18, East Punjab General Sales Tax Act of 1948 as to their liability to pay sales tax tout in each one of the cases they weretold by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab, by letter dated 6-2-1952

"that the intention of Government underlying the exemption contained in item 57 of the schedule appended to the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, is to exempt ghanis worked by human or animal power only and not by electric power."

3. In each one of these petitions the allegation is that the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab, or the officers under him are threatening to levy sales tax on edible oils manufactured by kohlus run by electric power and have called upon the various petitioners on various dates to pay the tax. It is not alleged that they have made use of the machinery provided under the Punjab Sales Tax Act, but they have come to this Court on the ground that there is no other remedy as efficacious and as expedient as given to them by Article 226 of the Constitution.

4. The liability to pay sales, tax is attacked on several grounds:

(i) that edible oils manufactured in oil extractors worked by electricity are covered by item 67 of the Schedule attached to the Act;

(ii) that the East Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 , is ultra vires as the Act axes no limit for taxation and delegates the power to fix the rate to the provincial government which is an illegal delegation of legislative power; and

(iii) that in 1952 the Punjab Legislature passed an Act, being Act 19 of 1952, fixing a limit of two-pice per rupee as being the ceiling of the tax and that this Act is unconstitutional on the ground that it is contrary to the provisions of the Parliamentary Act 52 of 1952, the Essential Goods (Declaration and Regulation of Tax on Sale or Purchase) Act, 1952, which came into force on 9-8-1952, and it also contravenes the provisions of Article 286(3) of the Constitution of India.

5. The learned Advocate-General on behalf of the opposite party has taken a preliminary objection that in this case there is no allegation that any contravention of the fundamental rights arises and that the only ground for the petitioners coming to this Court direct without seeking relief under the machinery provided by the Sales Tax Act of 1948 is that the article taxed is not within the Act of 1948, that there is unconstitutional delegation of legislative power and that there is contravention of the Parliamentary Act 52 of 1952 and therefore he should have proceeded in accordance with the provisions of the Act and not come direct to this court.

6. The petitioners reply to this is that there is no other remedy which is equally appropriate, efficacious or expeditious as the remedy given by Article 226 of the Constitution, but I am unable to agree with this. Nor is there any sound ground for short-circuiting the procedure provided by the East Punjab Sales Tax Act 46 of 1948. Section 4 of that Act is the charging section. Section 5 deals with the rates and S. 6 with what are tax-free goods. Sections 7, 8 and 9 deal with registration and publication of names of dealers. Section 10 deals with payment of tax and returns, Section 11 with assessment of tax and Section 14 with production and inspection of accounts and documents. By Section 18 it is provided that the Commissioner can determine any one of the five points