JUDGMENT : ( 1. ) THE Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior, which is the Tribunal constituted under the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (in short "the Act") has referred to this Court the following three questions for its opinion under Section 44 (1) of the Act: (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellant was entitled to a deduction under Section 2 (r) (ii) on account of sales of material taken out from the condemned coaches, which were purchased after paying full sales tax to the railway ? (2) Whether the order of the Tribunal holding that deduction could be granted only if there was a sale on declaration, was according to law ? (3) Whether the order of the Tribunal is legally correct ? ( 2. ) THE brief facts necessary to answer the aforesaid questions are that the assessee-applicant deals in scrap including iron scrap and was assessed to tax under the Act for the Diwali year 1972-73. The applicant had bid at an auction of old railway coaches, after payment of full tax. The coaches were required to be broken and the excluded fittings under the terms of the auction to be delivered to the railways and the remainder was to be removed by the applicant. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the assessing authority and the first appellate authority, the applicant preferred second appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal held that the goods purchased by the applicant were only the resultant scrap from the coaches. The resultant scrap which according to the Tribunal was purchased by the applicant-assessee included iron scrap, aluminium scrap, timber and glass, etc. In the instant case, we are concerned only with the sale of iron scrap, inasmuch as sales tax was assessed on the applicant on the sale of the said iron scrap. ( 3. ) IT has been urged by the Learned Counsel for the applicant that since iron scrap constituted declared goods under Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and since the petitioner had already paid sales tax at the stage of purchase of the iron scrap, no sales tax was payable at the stage of sale of the said iron scrap, by him subsequently. Reliance in support of this submission has been placed on Sections 14 and 15 (a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. ( 4. ) HAVING heard the Learned Counsel for the parties, we find substance in this submission. The finding of the Tribunal is that what was purchased by the applicant constituted scrap including iron scrap. The applicant had paid sales tax at the time of the purchase of the iron scrap and that iron scrap constituted declared goods under Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act. There seems to be no doubt that Section 15 (a) of the Central Sales Tax Act was attracted to the facts of the instant case. At the relevant time, iron scrap was mentioned at Sub-clause (a) of Clause (iv) of Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act and consequently constituted declared goods under Section 14 of the Act. Section 15 (a) of the Central Sales Tax Act at the relevant time read as hereunder: 15. Restrictions and conditions in regard to tax on sale or purchase of declared goods within a State.--Every sales tax law of a State shall, in so far as it imposes or authorises the imposition of a tax on the sale or purchase of declared goods, be subject to the following restrictions and conditions, namely:- (a) the tax payable under that law in respect of any sale or purchase of such goods inside the State shall not exceed (three per cent) of the sale or purchase price thereof, and such tax shall not be levied at more than one stage; (b) where a tax has been levied. . . . On a plain reading of Section 15 (a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, sales tax in respect of goods declared under Section 14 thereof cannot be levied at more than one stage. This view finds support from the decision of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Commissioner, Sales Tax, U. P. , Lucknow v. Chokhani Co. [1982] 51 STC 195, as well as a decision of a learned single Judge mentioned in the appendix See Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. v. Nirankari Engineering, Kanpur [1982] 51 STC 197 (All.) [app. ], to the aforesaid decision. ( 5. [1982] 51 STC 195, as well as a decision of a learned single Judge mentioned in the appendix See Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. v. Nirankari Engineering, Kanpur [1982] 51 STC 197 (All.) [app. ], to the aforesaid decision. ( 5. ) IN view of the foregoing discussion, our answer to question No. (3) referred to us is that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case mentioned above, sales tax was not leviable on the sale of iron scrap by the assessee-applicant in view of the fact that iron scrap constituted declared goods under Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act and the applicant-assessee had already paid tax at the stage of purchasing the iron scrap which was subsequently sold by him. This would be so in view of the restriction placed in this behalf by Section 15 (a) of the Central Sales Tax Act and consequently the order of the Tribunal is not legally correct. ( 6. ) IN view of our answer to question No. (3), we find it unnecessary to answer questions Nos. (1) and (2 ). In the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their own costs.