IMPORTANT POINT
There being no substantive provision in the Central Sales Tax Act requiring the payment of interest on Central sales tax, the States sales tax authorities cannot, for the purpose of collecting and enforcing payment of Central sales tax, charge interest thereon.

JUDGMENT

S.P. Bharucha, J.-These appeals impugn a judgment and order of the High Court at Guwahati, It may be immediately stated that, there having been some difference of opinion between the two learned Judges who first heard the writ petitions filed by the appellants, four questions were referred to a third learned Judge and it is the first of those four questions which will determine these appeals.

2. Briefly stated for the purposes of this judgment, the facts are these: The appellants manufacture and sell petroleum coke, which are goods declared by Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act. The appellants are registered as dealers under the Central Act and liable to pay Central sales tax on the petroleum coke that is the subject of inter-State sales. The payments of Central sales tax on inter-State sales of petroleum coke were delayed. For the assessment years 1974 to 1980 the appellants were required by the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 24% per annum thereon, in purported exercise of the provisions of Section 35A of the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947. The writ petitions were filed by the appellants challenging the imposition of such interest.

3. The four questions which were referred to the third learned Judge read thus:

"(1) Section 9(2) of the Central Act did not visualise any payment of interest.

(2) If interest were to be charged by the force of Section 35A of the Assam sales Tax Act, 1947 which visualises imposition of a minimum interest at the rate of 6% per annum, the same would violate Section 15(a) of the Central Act which has put a limit of 4% in so far as the tax payable on the goods dealt with the appellants were concerned.

(3) Charging of interest on the amount of tax assessed because of what have been provided in Rule 42A of the Assam Sales Tax Rules, 1947 was not permissible inasmuch as Rule 42A was ultra vires Section 35A.

(4) Section 35A of the said Act was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

4. Section 9(2) of the Central Act, as it stood at the relevant time, read thus:

"9(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder, the authorities for the time being empowered to assess, re-assess, collect and enforce payment of any tax under the general sales tax law of the appropriate State shall, on behalf of the Government of India, assess, reassess, collect and enforce payment of tax, including any penalty, payable by a dealer under this. Act as if the tax or penalty payable by such a dealer under this Act is a tax or penalty payable under the general sales tax law of the State; and for this purpose they may exercise all or any of the powers they have under the general sales tax law of the State; and the provisions of such law, including provisions relating to returns, provisional assessment, advance payment of tax, registration of the transferee of any business, imposition of the tax liability of a person carrying on business on the transferee of, or successor to, such business, transfer of liability of any firm of Hindu undivided family to pay tax in the event of the dissolution of such firm or partition of such family, recovery of tax from third parties, appeals, reviews, revisions, references, refunds, rebates, penalties charging or payment of interest, compounding of offences and treatment of documents furnished by a dealer as confidential, shall apply accordingly."

5. It was contended before the learned third Judge that, there being no mention of interest in the first part of Section 9(2) of the Central Act, the appellants were not liable to pay interest as aforestated. Reliance was placed upon the judgment of this Court in Khemka and Company v. State of Maharashtra1. The learned third Judge noted the view taken by this two brother Judges on the first question and found that there was unanimity on the result, though for different reasons. He, therefore, took the same view and held that interest w