JUDGMENT SHUKLA, J. - At the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, the Tribunal (Board of Revenue, M.P.) has under section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (the Act hereafter), referred the following question for our opinion : "Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the dealer, who has his business only in part of a year is to be allowed the benefit of Notification No. 4290-3070-V-ST dated 14th December, 1967, if other conditions are satisfied ?" 2. A few basic facts as stated by the Tribunal may be stated. The assessee commenced his business of selling second-hand bardanas (gunny bags) on 25th November, 1967. His tax liability was determined with effect from 25th November, 1967, and he was assessed to tax for the period 25th November, 1967, to 31st March, 1968. During this period his gross turnover was Rs. 27,752. The Sales Tax Officer assessed him to tax at the rate of 7 per cent. 3. The assessee had denied his liability to tax and claimed exemption in view of Notification No. 4290-3070-V-ST dated 14th December, 1967, reproduced in the order of the Board of Revenue, annexure F (marked by us as the order of reference has not been marked as an annexure). The Sales Tax Officer rejected this claim and the assessee's appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was dismissed. When the matter came before the Tribunal (Board of Revenue), the Tribunal held that the exemption allowed under the notification mentioned above could be availed of by the assessee because his turnover during the period in which he carried out his business was less than Rs. 50,000 and the authorities below erroneously held that an assessee could get the benefit of this notification only if he had carried on the business for the entire period of 12 months. Accordingly the appeal was allowed and it was held that the assessee was not liable to tax as his turnover was below Rs. 50,000. 4. The notification under reference is as follows : "Notification No. 4290-3070-V-ST dated the 14th December, 1967. Accordingly the appeal was allowed and it was held that the assessee was not liable to tax as his turnover was below Rs. 50,000. 4. The notification under reference is as follows : "Notification No. 4290-3070-V-ST dated the 14th December, 1967. In exercise of the powers conferred by section 12 of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (No. 2 of 1959), the State Government hereby exempts in whole the class of goods mentioned in column (1) of the schedule below from the payment of tax for the period specified in column (2) and subject to restrictions and conditions specified in column (3) of the said schedule :- SCHEDULE -------------------------------------------------------------------- Class of goods Period Restrictions and conditions subject to which exemption is allowed (1) (2) (3) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Second-hand gunny From the date of When sold by a dealer registered bags (bardana (Tran- publication of under the Madhya Pradesh General sliterated from this notification Sales Tax Act, 1958, dealing Hindi)) including in the M.P. Gaze- exclusively in second-hand gunny second-hand hessian tte to 31st March, bags and second-hand hessian (tat (Transliterated 1968 (both days and whose turnover in a year from Hindi)) inclusive). does not exceed Rs. 50,000 on his furnishing a true declaration in the appended form that the goods in respect of which exemption is claimed have neither been imported nor manufactured by him. APPENDIX Declaration I ........................... a dealer holding registration certificate No. ............... under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, hereby declare that .............................. (quantity in figures) second-hand gunny bags and/or ................................. (quantity in metre length) of second-hand hessian of the value of Rs. ........................ in respect of which exemption from the payment of tax is claimed have neither been imported nor manufactured by me. 2. I further declare that I exclusively deal in second-hand gunny bags and/or second-hand hessian and that my turnover during the year .................. does not exceed Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand). Signature of the dealer or his agent duly authorised in writing in this behalf." 5. The learned counsel for the department contended that the words "whose turnover in a year does not exceed Rs. 50,000" in column (3) can apply only to a dealer who has carried on business in second-hand gunny bags or hessian for the entire period of a year. The learned counsel for the department contended that the words "whose turnover in a year does not exceed Rs. 50,000" in column (3) can apply only to a dealer who has carried on business in second-hand gunny bags or hessian for the entire period of a year. Our attention was invited to the definition of "year" under section 2(u) of the Sales Tax Act, which reads as under : "'Year' means the twelve months ending on the 31st day of March or, if the accounts maintained by any dealer are made up to any other day in respect of a year ending on any date other than the 31st day of March, then at the option of the dealer the year ending on the day to which his accounts have been so made up." It was contended that the notification in question refers to the word "year" as defined under this Act and, therefore, a dealer who has carried on business for less than 12 months will not get the benefit of this notification. 6. We cannot accept this construction of the notification. As observed by the Tribunal the exemption was made to help small dealers dealing exclusively in second-hand gunny bags. To refuse benefit to a dealer who carried on business only for a part of the year and whose turnover was less than Rs. 50,000 would clearly be contrary to the purpose of the notification and, therefore, the word "year" occurring in column (3) of the said notification has to be understood in its general sense meaning the assessment year during which the dealer actually carried on his business. There could be no legal basis for the Sales Tax Officer for assuming the turnover at more than Rs. 50,000 by determining the same at a pro rata basis on taking into account the actual turnover for a part of the year at Rs. 27,752. Perusal of the declaration appended to the notification under reference would further strengthen the view that every dealer whose turnover did not exceed Rs. 50,000 during the year of his business qualified for the benefit under the notification. He has only to declare that his "turnover during the year .................. does not exceed Rs. 50,000". Unless it was shown as a fact that during the period of the assessment year in which the dealer carried on his business his turnover exceeded Rs. 50,000 during the year of his business qualified for the benefit under the notification. He has only to declare that his "turnover during the year .................. does not exceed Rs. 50,000". Unless it was shown as a fact that during the period of the assessment year in which the dealer carried on his business his turnover exceeded Rs. 50,000 the department was bound to exempt such a dealer from payment of sales tax. 7. In this view of the matter we hold that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the dealer who has his business only in part of the year is to be allowed the benefit of Notification No. 4290-3070-V-ST dated 14th December, 1967, if other conditions are satisfied. Thus, we answer the question in the affirmative. 8. There shall be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.