AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Chandrakantaraj Urs, J.-The question which falls for determination in this case is whether the petitioner''s turn-over in the sale of silk sarees known as ''Banaras Silk Sarees'' should be wholly exempted on account of the fact that it fell out-side the definition of silk fabrics having regard to the explanation to Section 5(3)(c) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. Besides, the self-assertion and self-supporting documents produced by the assessees, there was no evidence before any of the authorities below to demonstrate, the silk sarees sold as Benaras Silk Sarees contained more than 40% of other fabric or yarn which would make it cotton fabric as defined under the Central Excise and Salt Act.
It is the settled principle of law that the assessee under the statute if he claims exemption from exigiblity to tax, must discharge the burden of entitling him to such exemption. If that burden is not discharged, he cannot be permitted to state that such burden would be on the Revenue when admittedly sarees sold are silk sarees which contain silk in part. The quantum of other material used in the fabric should be proved by the assessee. That having not been done, the Tribunal has committed no error in rejecting the appeal. No such question has been canvassed for our consideration.
Our attention has been drawn to the Judgment of this Court dated 17th July, 1990 in STA 22 of 1986. In the said case, this Court, in a Division Bench ruling found fault with the Commissioner for Sales Tax in exercising his jurisdiction under Section 22A of the Act and setting aside the appellate order without assigning reasons. Besides the fact that the turn-over involved in that case also related to Banaras Silk, there is no common feature between the two. We do not think petitioner can derive any assistance from the said decision.
Subject to the above, this petition is rejected.
Petition rejected.