(1) Sales Tax Revision No.248/08-Asstt. Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind.), (2)Sales Tax Tevision no.249/2008-Asstt. Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind. Order dt:25/9/2008 1/3 S.B.CIVIL SALES TAX REVISION NO.248/2008 (Assistant Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind.) S.B.CIVIL SALES TAX REVISION NO.249/2008 (Assistant Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind.) DATE OF ORDER : 25/9/2008 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.Vinit Mathur, for the petitioner-revenue. 1. Heard learned counsel. 2. Both the revision petitions are directed against the concurrent findings of two appellate authorities below in favour of assessee that the goods namely Mustard Oil sold by the assessee was covered by the Notification S.O.282 dated 7/6/1996 prescribing rate of tax @ 2% on the inter-State sales made by the assessee subject to fulfillment of condition of furnishing of the declaration in form `D' under the said Notification. 3. Both the authorities have held that since the condition of the Notification was satisfied by the respondent-assessee, the respondent- assessee was entitled to concessional rate of tax @ 2% under the said Notification. 4. Learned counsel for the Revenue, however, submits that since the other Notification, serial no.1026, S.O.124 dated 28/9/1995 (1) Sales Tax Revision No.248/08-Asstt. Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind.), (2)Sales Tax Tevision no.249/2008-Asstt. Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind. Order dt:25/9/2008 2/3 prescribing 3% rate of tax generally covering all the commodities was also available, therefore, learned Assessing Authority was right in imposing 3% tax under the said Notification and appellate authorities erred in applying Notification dt:7/6/1996. 5. Having heard learned counsel, this Court finds no force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the Revenue because it is well settled rule of interpretation that special law will override and prevail over the general law and once the particular notification dated 7/6/96 covers the commodity in question namely Edible Oil, therefore, the appellate authorities were right in upholding the rate of tax of 2% under the said Notification and not 3% rate of tax under the general notification covering all commodities. As a matter of fact, no question of law arise in these revision petitions for consideration under Section 86 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994. 6. The revision petitions are found to be devoid of merit and same are accordingly dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the respondent-assessee. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. (1) Sales Tax Revision No.248/08-Asstt. Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind.), (2)Sales Tax Tevision no.249/2008-Asstt. Commissioner, Hanumangarh vs. M/s Jyoti Cotton Ind. Order dt:25/9/2008 3/3 item no.5 & 6 baweja/-