Chandra Reddy, C.J.
1. The problem posed for solution in this Tax Revision Case is whether Co-operative Milk Supply Societies and Unions are exempt from payment of sales tax.
2. The Tadapalligudem Co-operative Milk Supply Society Ltd., which was started in or about the year 1949, was levied tax on the sale of milk for the charging year 1954-55. The impost was with reference to sales to the consumers direct. This was contested by the Society on the ground that it was exempt from taxation both under the Essential Goods (Declaration and Regulation of Tax of Sales or Purchase) Act (Act LII of 1952) and by reason of G.O. Ms. No. 2333, Revenue, 7th September, 1951. The objections of the assessee were overruled by the Taxing Authorities. His appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was also not successful. Hence, he has filed this revision against the order of the Appellate Tribunal.
3. In support of this petition, the same points are urged before us. The contention is based on clause 3 of the Schedule framed under section 2 of Act LII of 1952 which comprises 'fresh milk, whole or separate, and milk products, including butter, ghee, chana, khoa, but excluding sweetmeats'.
4. The question for consideration is whether the petitioner could claim the benefit of this Act. We feel that it cannot be extended to the petitioner in view of section 3 of Act LII of 1952 which recites :
'No law made after the commencement of this Act by the legislature of a State imposing, or authorising the imposition of, a tax on the sale or purchase of any goods declared by this Act to be essential for the life of the community shall have effect unless it has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent.'
5. It is plain that it is only law made by the State legislature after the Central legislation has come into effect, that is governed by the latter statute. If the law that is sought to be enforced had been in force prior to it (Act LII of 1952) it is unaffected by Act LII of 1952. The Madras General Sales Tax Act under which the present levy was made was passed in the year 1939 and consequently it survives, notwithstanding the provisions of Act LII of 1952. In that premises, the assessment of sales tax in this case cannot be impugned.
6. We now pass on to consider the Government Order called in aid by Shri Vidyasagar. It reads thus :
'In exercise of the powers conferred by section 6(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 (Madras Act IX of 1939), His Excellency the Government of Madras hereby exempts Co-operative Milk Supply Societies and Union (i) which have been formed on or after the 1st July, 1949, and (ii) which may hereafter be formed, from payment of sales tax under that Act for a period of three years commencing on and from the date of formation of each such society or union.'
7. It is manifest that exemption from sales tax was granted to the societies and unions enumerated in the Government Order extracted above for a period of three years from the date of the formation of such societies or unions. We are told that prior to that tax was being levied on milk and all societies, irrespective of their nature, would have been liable to tax but for this Government Order. This Government Order was to last only for a period of three years.
8. By a subsequent Government Order, this exemption was withdrawn in certain respects. That Government Order, viz., G.O. No. 2790, Revenue, dated 24th September, 1953, is in these words :
'In exercise of the powers conferred by section 6(1) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 (Madras Act IX of 1939), and in supersession of Revenue Department Notification No. 395 dated the 7th September, 1951, published at page 1361 of Part I of the Fort St. George Gazette, dated the 18th September, 1951, as subsequently amended, the Governor of Madras hereby exempts co-operative milk supply societies and unions from payment of sales tax in respect of all sales of milk by them except the sale to the actual consumer.'
9. Shri Vidyasagar invites us to hold that the Government Orders extracted above should be read together and that the exemption granted in the earlier Government Order, (i.e., G.O. Ms. No. 2333, Revenue, 7th September, 1951), still continues to be in force. We do not think we can give effect to this contention. Surely, when the second Government Order says that it was issued in supersession of the prior one, the first Government Order is abrogated. The second Government Order does not seek to wipe out the exemption altogether, but confines it to sales by the co-operative societies to other institutions. The exemption is withdrawn only in regard to sales of milk to the actual consumers. In other words, in so far as the exemption bears on the sales to the consumers, the earlier exemption is rescinded. The submission of Shri Vidyasagar is, therefore, inadmissible.
10. In the result, the Tax Revision Case is dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs.