GSTR No. 9 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. GSTR No. 9 of 2004 Date of decision 29.1.2009 M/s Kagaz print-N-Pack (India) Pvt. Ltd. Bahadurgarh, Distt. Jhajjar ...Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA Present: Mr. K.L.Goyal ,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Addl. AG Hy. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. At the instance of the dealer the Haryana Tax Tribunal, Chandigarh has referred the following question of law for adjudication of this Court: “ Whether the 'export sale' is not part of gross turnover and therefore not includible for the purpose of calculation of notional tax liability under Rule 28A(4)(a) of Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 ?” Without going into the details of the controversy raised it would be appropriate to notice that a same question of law was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of M/s Kagaz print-N-Pack (India) Pvt. Ltd. Bahadurgarh, Distt. Jhajjar v. State of Haryana (2006) 28 PHT 266 (PLH) which was a case of the dealer itself and the question of law has been GSTR No. 9 of 2004 2 answered against the revenue and in favour of the dealer. The Division Bench has held that turn over of goods exported outside the territory of India would not form part of 'turnover' on which notional tax liability is to be calculated for the purposes of deduction thereof out of the quantum of benefit of exemption being claimed by the dealer under Rule 28 A of the Rules. We are in respectful agreement with the view taken by the Division Bench and accordingly answer the question against the revenue and in favour of the dealer. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (H.S. Bhalla ) 29 .1.2009 Judge okg