ORDER : 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. On 23.3.1988, the judgment of this Court was delivered which has now been asked to be reviewed at the instance of the State. It is alleged on behalf of the State that the latest amendment of the State Sales Tax Act had not been placed before this Court at the time of hearing and since the Act by later amendment has been made effective from a prior date, the demand raised should have been sustained. 3. We have looked into the various aspects involved in the matter and are of the view that the review petition should be dismissed. This is on account of the fact that after the Forty-Sixth Amendment of the Constitution, State legislation was necessary to give effect to liability of sales-tax and the Andhra Pradesh Act was a prospective legislation. The incidence of sales-tax is ordinarily passed on to the customer and in the event of accepting the retrospective amendment a liability would be created without affording any opportunity to the hoteliers to pass on the incidence of the tax. In these circumstances, we do not think there is any justification for review. The petition is accordingly dismissed.