ORDER
Tirath S. Thakur, J.
1. The petitioner-company is engaged in the manufacture and sale of chemicals and stands duly registered under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. In the course of its business it purchases materials like mono chloro benzene, nitric acid, sulphuric acid, H.S.D., etc., besides other materials like HDPE bags and empty barrels. In connection with these purchases, the petitioner requires 'C' forms for which the petitioner appears to have made an application to the respondent-Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Dharwad on May 13, 1997. This application was followed by a reminder dated July 21, 1997 and a notice sent by the petitioner's lawyer dated July 29, 1997. Having failed to evoke any response, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for a mandamus directing the respondent to issue a book containing 50 'C' forms as per the request made in application dated May 13, 1997.
2. A statement of objections has been filed on behalf of the respondents in which it is pointed out that the petitioner has been assessed for payment of an amount of Rs. 51,161 under the Entry Tax Act. An appeal filed by the petitioner against the order of assessment is said to have been dismissed by the appellate authority despite which the petitioner has not remitted the amount of tax due from it. It is urged that default on the part of the petitioner in making the payment of amount of tax validly assessed against it disentitles it from claiming the issue of 'C' forms from the respondents. I, however, find no substance in the defence set up by the respondent. The provisions of Section 8, Sub-section (4) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Rule 12(1) of the Rules framed under the said Act envisage a declaration in the prescribed form to be furnished by the registered dealer to whom the goods are sold containing the prescribed particulars in order that the seller may be entitled to the benefit of Section 8(1) of the said Act. Sub-section (4)(a) of Section 8, requires the prescribed declaration forms to be obtained from the prescribed authority. There is nothing in Section 8, Sub-sections (1) or (4) nor is there any provision contained in the Rules framed under the Act which may empower the prescribed authority to withhold the issue of the requisite 'C' forms only on the ground that the dealer who applies for the same is in arrears of tax. In the absence of any such power it is difficult to see how the prescribed authority can decline to issue the forms only because there is some default on the part of the dealer in making the payment of tax determined against it. That is especially so when the provisions of the Karnataka Entry Tax Act under which the amount of tax has been determined against the petitioner, provides an effective machinery for recovery of any such amount payable by an assessee. The said machinery, inter alia, envisages recovery of the outstanding tax amount as arrears of land revenue as also by invoking the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure regulating recovery of amounts levied as fine. These provisions are no doubt efficacious and wherever a default is committed by an assessee, the authorities concerned can invoke the same for quick and summary recovery of the amount from him. That being so, it is not permissible for the prescribed authority to withhold the 'C' forms only on account of the default committed by the assessee in the payment of the tax determined against it. Any such stance taken by the prescribed authority would amount to prescribing an additional mode for recovery of the tax amount not otherwise recognised by Section 8(4) of the Entry Tax Act. If the Legislature really intended to provide withholding of 'C' forms to a dealer as one of the modes for coercing him to make the payment of tax amount held recoverable, nothing prevented it from prescribing that also as one of the permissible modes for recovery. Since however Section 8(4) of the Entry Tax Act does not sanction the method adopted by the prescribed authority as one of the modes of recovery for the amount of tax determined under the Act, it is impermissible for it to take resort to the same for compelling payment. In the circumstances, therefore I see no justification behind the stand taken by the respondent for refusing to issue of 'C' forms to the petitioner. The writ petition accordingly succeeds and is hereby allowed. The respondents shall issue the requisite forms to the petitioner in terms of its application dated May 13, 1997 within one week from today. There shall however be no orders as to costs.