ORDER This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner is a "dealer" within the meaning of the definition of that term contained in Section 2(c) of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947. 2. The Regional Assistant Sales Tax Commissioner, Nagpur, assessed the sales tax payable by the petitioner at Rs. 16,515-15-6 on the basis that his turnover for the period of assessment was Rs. 2,91,786-15-6. According to the petitioner, his account books showed that the actual sale price realised by him for the commodity which he has sold to his customers during this period was Rs. 2,75,883-11-3 and that it is this figure which should have been treated as the taxable as the taxable turnover by the Assistant Sales Tax Commissioner. The petitioner admits that in addition to this amount he received from the persons, who purchased various commodities from him, a total sum of Rs. 15,903-4-3, but he says that he received this amount on account of the sales tax which was payable by the purchasers with respects to the goods purchased by them. According to him, this amount cannot be added to the actual sale price received by him and treated as part of the taxable turnover. 3. We may mention here that the figures given by the petitioner in his petition do not tally with those appearing in the order of assessment passed by the Assistant Sales Tax Commissioner or with those contained in the order in appeal of the Sales Tax Commissioner. As, however, nothing turns on these figures we would accept those stated by the petitioner in his petition as correct. 4. The point which is raised by the petitioner before us is that the amount which he has realised from the customers by way of sales tax cannot be treated as part of the taxable turnover and consequently no tax can be recovered in respect of his amount. 5. In Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 247 of 1951 a reference has been made to this Court under Section 23(1) of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, by the Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, on the following question of law :- "A dealer realises from a purchaser an amount which he calls 'sales tax' in addition to the price he would have recovered from him, had not the Sales Tax Act been in force. Is the additional amount he recovers calling it sales tax, liable to be included in the 'sale price' as defined in Section 2(h) of the Act ?" This question is identical with the one which arises in the petition. Our order will therefore govern the disposal of the petition as well as Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 247 of 1951. 6. In order to answer this question it is necessary to examine the relevant provisions of the Sales Tax Act. Section 4(1) of the Act runs thus :- "Every dealer whose turnover during the year preceding the commencement of this Act exceeded the taxable quantum shall be liable to pay tax in accordance with the provisions of this Act on all sales effected after the commencement of this Act." This section makes it clear that the tax is payable to the State by the dealer as defined in Section 2(c) of the Act and by none else. This conclusion is reinforced by reference to other provisions of the Act. In particular, we would refer to Section 5, which deals with the rate of tax and reads thus :- "5. (1) The tax payable by a dealer under this Act shall be levied on his taxable turnover at the rate of - (a) twelve pies in the rupee in relation to the classes of goods mentioned in Part I of Schedule I; (b) three pies in the rupee in relation to the classes of goods mentioned in Part II of Schedule I; (c) six pies in the rupee in relation to the classes of goods not included in Schedule I or Schedule II." "Turnover" is defined as followed in Section 2(j) of the Act :- "'turnover' means the aggregate of the amounts of sale prices, and parts of sale prices received or receivable by a dealer in respect of the sale or supply of goods or in respect of the sale supply of goods in the carrying out of any contract, effected or made during the prescribed period;" The definition of "turnover" leaves no doubt that everything received by a dealer from a purchaser is treated as the sale price for the purpose of the Act and tax is assessed on that basis, deducting therefrom the price of goods which is exempted from taxation by Section 6 of the Act. Sale price is also defined in Section 2(h) of the Act. Sale price is also defined in Section 2(h) of the Act. The relevant part of the definition runs thus :- "'Sale price' means the amount payable to a dealer as valuable consideration for - (i) the sale of any goods, less any sum allowed as cash discount according to ordinary trade practice, but including any sum charged for anything done by the dealer in respect of the goods at the time of or before delivery thereof other than the cost of freight or delivery or the cost of installation when such cost is separately charged..............." This definition also makes it clear that every sum of money received by a dealer from his purchaser is a part of the sale price. It would thus be clear from all this that a sum which a dealer has received from his purchaser in respect of sales tax payable on the goods must also be regarded as part of the sale price. 7. It is argued before us that even though a dealer is liable to pay sales tax under the law it is open to him to shift his liability to pay the tax on to the purchaser and that when he does that he cannot be asked to treat what he has collected in respect of tax as part of the sale price. There is no doubt that apart from the law of price control a vendor of goods is entitled to recover from his vendee any sum of money as the price of the goods sold by him to the vendee. It is also, open to him to require of his vendee to pay to him a sum of money which, according to him, is equivalent to the tax payable by him to the State or to any other authority in respect of the transaction. That, however, is entirely a matter between a vendor and a vendee. In so far as the State is concerned, the sum total of the recovery made by a vendor from his vendee is the sale price. 8. It is next urged that the vendor has collected the tax as an agent of the Government and that therefore the amount which he collected by way of tax should be treated as separate and should not be added to the taxable turnover. 8. It is next urged that the vendor has collected the tax as an agent of the Government and that therefore the amount which he collected by way of tax should be treated as separate and should not be added to the taxable turnover. In support of this learned counsel for the petitioner refers us to a certain publication purporting to have been made under the authority of the Government in which the following observations appear :- "The traders can have no complaint at all. They have to pay nothing from them (i.e., out of their own pockets). They act as Government's 'agency' for collecting the tax from the consuming public. As regards the controlled articles, the seller has to show the tax collected separately in the memo of sale." On the face of it, there is nothing to show that this was issued under the authority of the Government. Even assuming that it was so issued, nothing contained therein can in any way control the provisions of the Sales Tax Act. There is no provision in the Act which constitutes a dealer an agent of the Government nor is there anything in the Act which says that the tax is to be recovered from the purchaser. In the circumstances we do not attach any value the the publication on which reliance is placed by the learned counsel. 9. In our opinion, the amount recovered by a dealer from his preachers in respect of sales tax must under the definition of "sale price" be regarded as part thereof and that it has to be taken into account while arriving at a dealer's taxable turnover. A similar question arose before the High Court at Calcutta in Bata Shoe Co. v. Member, Board of Revenue ([1949] 1 S.T.C. 193; 53 C.W.N. 278). Section 2(h) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, which defines "sales price", has been reproduced in the judgment. That provision appears to be identical with Section 2(h) of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947. The learned Judges of the Calcutta High Court construed this definition in the same way as we have done and have held that the sale price as defined in Section 2(h) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, includes any amount charged or realised separately as sales tax from the purchaser by the dealer. 10. The learned Judges of the Calcutta High Court construed this definition in the same way as we have done and have held that the sale price as defined in Section 2(h) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, includes any amount charged or realised separately as sales tax from the purchaser by the dealer. 10. We would, therefore, answer the question referred to us in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 247 of 1951 in the affirmative and dismiss Miscellaneous Petition No. 88 of 1952 with costs. Costs of the reference will be borne by the applicant in Miscellaneous Civil Case No. 247 of 1951. Counsel's fee Rs. 50 in each case. Reference answered in the affirmative. Application dismissed.