@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
B.M. Lal, C.J.@mdashThe Petitioner M/s. Steel City Beverage (P) Ltd. Is a company Incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and manufactures soft drinks under the brand name of ''sprint'' Thrill'', ''Rush'' and ''Soda'' products. This Company is registered as a Small Scale Industries with the Industries Department of the State. Besides it is also registered with the Sales Tax Department under the Bihar Sales Tax Act as also under the Central Sales Tax Act.
2. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner prays for quashing the order passed by the Commercial Tax Tribunal in Revision Case No. 49 of 1989 whereby rejecting the revision petition the claim of the Petitioner for set off of tax in respect of purchases of raw materials from outside the State of Bihar has been denied. The Petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Adityapur Circle, Jamshedpur, as also the order passed by the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes (Appeal) Jamshedpur, who refused to give adjustment of tax in respect of purchase of raw materials which were purchased from outside the State of Bihar but the finished goods i.e. soft drinks were manufactured within the State of Bihar and sold within State of Bihar. Lastly a prayer for issuance of appropriate writ against the Respondents commanding them to extend the benefit of Notification No. S.O. 614 dated 14th May, 1984, to the Petitioner has also been made.
3. The case as set out by the Petitioner is that under the provisions of Section 22 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act), the State Government issued a Notification No. S.O. 614 dated 14th May, 1984, by which every registered manufacturing dealer who Is running Industrial unit of the category and descriptions mentioned in columns 2 and 3 of the notification were entitled to adjust the amount of tax paid on purchase of raw materials used in manufacturing goods for sale within State of Bihar against the tax payable on finished products in Bihar and in the description and category it is mentioned that Industrial unit of small sector shall be entitled to this benefit if the unit has gone into production prior to 1st April, 1984 and has not availed of any concession of tax free purchase of raw materials under any notification issued under the Industrial Incentive Scheme of the State Government or if has gone into production on or after 1st April, 1984, should not have opted for concession of tax free purchase of raw materials. A copy of the said notification dated 14th May, 1984, is at Annexure-1 to the writ petition.
4. It is submitted that in the year 1985-86 the Petitioner had purchased raw materials from other State and has paid tax thereon to other State and had imported those raw materials in the State of Bihar for the purposes of manufacturing of soft drinks and after manufacturing the finished goods, soft drinks, were sold In Bihar. Accordingly, the Petitioner submitted Its return and had made a claim of set off of the entire tax paid under Bihar Sales Tax Act and under the Central Sales Tax Act.
5. It is further submitted that the assessing officer, without any basis and without any valid reason or ground, had rejected the claim of the Petitioner vide the order as contained in Annexure-3 to the writ application. Against the said order the Petitioner preferred an appeal and the appellate authority vide Its order dated 13.1.89 allowed the claim of the Petitioner but only to the extent of purchases made by the Petitioner of raw materials within the State of Bihar and disallowed the claim of tax paid by the Petitioner on purchase of raw materials which was purchased outside of the State and the goods were manufactured out of those raw materials within the State of Bihar and sold within the State of Bihar.
6. It appears that against the appellate order the Petitioner filed a revision application before the Tribunal reiterating the same plea and referring the notification issued u/s 22 of the Act. However, the revision application was also dismissed as discussed above holding that in the notification there is a clear stipulation that set off be allowed only on the raw materials purchased inside the State and the finished goods also sold inside the State.
7. For the better appreciation of the point in issue, we would like to reproduce the English version of the notification as also the Hindi version of the notification published in the Bihar Gazette in its extraordinary issue dated 14th May, 1984.
The 14th May, 1984
S.O. 614 ln exercise of the powers conferred u/s 22 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (Part I) (Bihar Act No. 5 of 1981), the Governor of Bihar, on being satisfied that it is necessary to do so in the interest of industrial growth, Is pleased to permit every registered manufacturing dealer, who is running an industrial unit of the category and description mentioned respectively in columns 2 and 3 of the table below, to adjust the amount of tax paid on the purchase of raw materials used in the manufacture of goods for sale within Bihar against the tax payable, on finished products in Bihar in the manner Indicated In para 2 of this order.
2(a) The amount of sales tax paid on purchase of raw materials used for manufacture of goods for sale within Bihar after the publication of this order in the official gazette may be deducted from the amount of tax payable on the sale of finished products for that month of the quarter as the case may be, but shall be limited only to the extent of tax actually payable on sales within Bihar.
8. A close scrutiny of the above two clauses as referred to above, does not envisage that the purchase of the raw material if had taken place within the State of Bihar only and manufacture and sale of finished goods had taken place within the State of Bihar only then set off of tax can be granted.
9. However, the said notification issued in Hindi version in Deonagri script is also reproduced.
(Emphasis supplied)
10. For better understanding Hindi version in Deonagri script is further reproduced in Roman script:
ROMAN SCRIPT OF HINDI VERSION OF THE NOTIFICATION.
14th May, 1984.
S.O. 614-Bihar Bit Adhinlyam, 1981, (Bihar Adhiniyam Sankhya 5, 1981) Bhag 1 Kl Dhara 22 Dwara Pradatt Shaktiyon Ka Prayog Karte Huye Bihar Rajyapal, Yeh Samadhan Kar Lene Par Kl Audhyogik Vikas Ke Hit Me Aaisha Kama Aawayashak Hal, Har Nibandhit Binirmata Bayaparl Kb, Jo Niche Ki Talika Ke Karamshah Ashtambh 2 aur 3 me Ullikhit Koti aur Bibran Ko Audhyogik Ikal Ki Shrenl Me Aata Ho, Taiyar Malo Ko Rajya Ke Aahdar Ki Gayi Bikri Par Deye Bikii Kar Madhe Bihar Ke Bhitar Bikri Ke Liye Mai KG Blnlrman Hetu Beyawaharit Kache Mai Kl Ralya Ko Bhitar Kharld Par Chukaya tiaya Blkrl Kar Kl Rashi Ko Samanji Karne Ki Aanumati Pradan Karte Hai.
(Emplmls supplied)
11. From the above quoted Hindi version as also of Roman script of the said notification specially of the portion to which emphasis Is added It appear that sot off is to be allowed In respect of such raw materials which have been purchased Inside the State and tax has been paid thereon Inside the State. There Is mention of geographical barrier that only If the raw material Is purchased within the territorial Jurisdiction of the State of Bihar then only the Petitioner can claim adjustment of tax paid thereon.
12. Now the controversy centrist round that If In between the notification published In English as well as In Hindi version In Deonagri script there appears some conflict then which notification English version or Hindi version in Deonagri script is to be believed or relied upon.
13. To resolve this controversy, it is necessary to take resort to Articles 345 and 348 of the Constitution which deal with the regional languages. Article 345 of the Constitution deals with the official Language or Languages of a State. The State of Bihar has enacted "The Bihar Language of Laws Act, 1955 (Bihar Act 32 of 1955)". Section 2 of the above said Act is emphatic which is being reproduced herein below;
2. Language to be used in Bills etc.-The language to be used in
(a)...
(b)...
(c)...
(d) all orders, rules, regulations, and bye-laws issued. by the State Government under the Constitution or under any law made before or after the commencement of the Constitution; shall be Hindi In ''Devanagri script.
14. Thus, In view of the provisions of Section 2(d) of the Bihar Language of Laws Act, 1965, referred to above, Language to be used even for preparing the bills to be presented before the Assembly Is to be prepared In Hindi Devanagri script. Thus, under the Bihar Language of Laws Act all orders, rules, regulations and bye-laws are Issued by the State Government in Hindi Devanagri script after the commencement of the Constitution of India and above said Act, referred to above, and only thereafter translation In English version Is made. Thus, from the original Hindi Devanagri script the translation in English has been made. Therefore, the original notification published In Hindi Devanagri script shall prevail.
15. Relevantly the case of
16. However, learned Counsel Sri B.P. Rajgarhla, Sr. Advocate, with great vehemence contended that a similar point came up for consideration before the Apex, Court In the case of State of Bihar v. Jhunjhunwala Industries 1998 (1) PLJR (S.C.) 73 and It has been held by the Apex Court that In the notification there was no such geographical limitation with regard. to the purchase of raw materials or payment of tax and, therefore, even If purchased from outside of the State and tax paid thereon, the said tax Is liable to be adjusted in the State of Bihar. Their Lordship of the Supreme Court In the case of State of Bihar (supra) has reached the conclusion on the basis of a notification dated 31.12.1980 where there was no such geographical limitation with regard to purchase or payment of tax and considering that notification the judgment in that case was delivered by the Apex Court. But in the instant case, as discussed above, the notification in question is dated 14th May, 1984 bearing No. S.O. 614 wherein there is clear mention of geographical limitation in the original Hindi version of the notification that raw materials purchased within the State of Bihar and tax paid thereon and the raw materials used in manufacture of goods within the State of Bihar and finished goods are sold in the State of Bihar in that case tax paid on purchase of raw materials shall be adjusted against the tax payable on the sale of finished goods within the State of Bihar.
17. Thus the ratio laid down in the State of Bihar (supra) has no application to the facts of the present case and is clearly distinguishable In view of the Hindi version of the notification In question. Thus it Is of no avail. Accordingly this petition falls and Is dismissed.
18. Before parting with the case we direct the State Government that an enquiry be conducted as to who Is responsible In making Incorrect translation from Hindi version of Notification No. S.O. 614 dated 14th May, 1984, to English version so that the erring officer may be brought to book.
19. However, due to such glaring and patent mistake In making Incorrect English translation from Hindi version of above said notification, the State exchequer has been put to a heavy financial loss of crore of rupees, therefore, this Court is constrained to direct that so far whatever benefit Is extended or derived on the basis of the Incorrect English translation of notification No. S.O. 614 dated 14th, May, 1984, to other dealers/manufacturers/industries, their cases be reopened, and after affording them reasonable opportunity of being heard the illegal concession which was granted to them be withdrawn and the said amount be recovered from them expeditiously as early as possible preferably within a period of six months.
20. In the result, this petition fails and is dismissed.
21. Registry of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, and also to the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, for compliance of this order.
S.K. Singh, J.
22. I agree.
