JUDGMENT S. K. KULSHRESTHA, J. - The Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior, has referred the following question of law under section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, read with section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for opinion of this Court at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh : "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the dealer is eligible to avail of the exemption under Separate Revenue Department Notification No. A3-41-81(31)-ST-V, dated June 29, 1982 in respect of the inter-State sale of goods manufactured by him, by virtue of his holding an eligibility certificate in fulfilment of one of the conditions laid down in the said notification for eligibility of the said exemption, although he was not holding a registration certificate under sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?" 2. The non-applicant assessee, Madhya Bharat Papers Ltd., Champa, is a dealer registered under both the State and the Central Act. The assessee is a new industrial unit for manufacture and wholesale of papers. The unit commenced production of January 10, 1984. Under Notification No. A-3-41-81(31)-ST-V, dated June 29, 1982, issued by the State Government under section 8(5) of the Central Act, the non-applicant assessee has been granted certificate of eligibility for exemption from payment of sales tax for a period of three years with effect from January 10, 1984 to January 9, 1987. During this period, the non-applicant assessee had effected total inter-State sales to the tune of Rs. 49,84,085, in respect thereof. The assessee claimed exemption on the basis of the eligibility certificate issued by the Industries Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh. The assessing officer held that since the non-applicant was not registered under section 7(1) of the Central Act, he was not entitled to exemption under the notification referred to above and assessed it to Central tax at the rate of 10 per cent. A penalty of Rs. 2,25,000, under section 18(6) of the State Act read with section 9(2) of the Central Act for for wilful failure to get himself registered under section 7(1) of the Central Act was also imposed. On appeal, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bilaspur, dismissed the same. 3. The assessee carried the matter in second appeal before the Board of Revenue. On appeal, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bilaspur, dismissed the same. 3. The assessee carried the matter in second appeal before the Board of Revenue. The Tribunal held that the certificate of eligibility issued by the Industries Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh, under the said notification was issued on the strength of the registration of the assessee for the period in question and therefore the assessee was entitled to exemption of the whole of the whole of the inter-State sales under the Central Act as the certificate once issued by the Industries Commissioner after the approval of the State Level Committee enured to the benefit of the assessee unless the competent authority had revoked or amended the same. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal allowed the deduction of the inter-State sales and the penalty imposed under section 18(6) of the State Act read with section 9(2) of the Central Act, was also set aside. 4. The Revenue moved an application before the Tribunal for the reference of the question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal to this Court and hence the said question has been referred. 5. We have heard the counsel for the parties. 6. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (5) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the State Government has issued the said notification dated June 29, 1982 to direct that no tax under the Central Act, shall be payable with effect from July 1, 1982, by the dealers specified in column No. 1 of the Schedule to the said notification and subject to fulfilment of the conditions contained therein. The notification classified the dealer into 3 classes and it is admitted that the assessee was claiming exemption from tax on the ground of it being covered within the meaning of dealer at serial No. 2 of the said notification. The portion of the notification relevant for the purpose of this reference, reads as under : "SCHEDULE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Class of dealers Period Restrictions and conditions subject to which exemption has been grated. (1) (2) (3) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2. The portion of the notification relevant for the purpose of this reference, reads as under : "SCHEDULE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Class of dealers Period Restrictions and conditions subject to which exemption has been grated. (1) (2) (3) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2. Dealers who (a) in the The dealer specified in column (1) are registered case of an shall continue to furnish dealer under the industry the prescribed return under Madhya Pradesh located in the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 General Sales a district (No. 74 of 1956), and Tax Act, 1958 specified in shall produce before the (No. 2 of 1959) category 'A' assessing authority at the and under Central of Part II of time of his assessment Sales Tax the annexure, a certificate issued by the Act, 1956 (No. 74 up to the Industries Commissioner, of 1956) date on M.P., or any officer which period authorised by him for the of 3 years, purpose, certifying that beginning such dealer is eligible to from the claim the exemption from date of payment of tax and that he commencement has opted for the scheme of of production, exemption from payment of expires; tax under the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (No. 2 of 1959), under the Separate Revenue Department Notification No. A3-41-81(35)-ST-V, dated October 23, 1981." (b) are registered (b) in the case as small-scale of an industry industrial units located in a with the district Industries specified in Department of the category 'B' Government of of Part II Madhya Pradesh or of the are registered annexure, up with the to the date Director-General on which of Technical period of 4 Development as years, an industrial beginning unit or are from the registered as date of industrial commencement units of production, by any authority expires; and duly empowered to do so by the State Government or Central Government or hold a licence under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (No. 65 of 1951); and (c) have set up (c) in the industry in any of case of any the districts industry specified in located in Part II of the a district annexure. specified in category 'C' of Part II of the annexure, up to the date on which period of 5 years, beginning from the date of commencement of production' expires. 7. specified in category 'C' of Part II of the annexure, up to the date on which period of 5 years, beginning from the date of commencement of production' expires. 7. Dwelling upon the requirement contained in clause (a) referred to above, the learned counsel for the Revenue strenuously argued that in absence of the registration under sub-section (1) of section (7) of the Central Act, the assessee could not be considered to be a dealer registered under section 7(1) of the said Act for claiming exemption from Sales Tax Act, under the Central Act on inter-State sales, he having registered himself under that Act under the provisions of section 7(2) only. The learned counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Imphalbs Manufacturing Co. reported in [1972] 29 STC 450. 8. It is true that a dealer indulging in inter-State sales has to get himself registered under section 7(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act, but it is also clear that this matter, in terms of the provisions made in column No. (3) of the notification, is required to be considered by the Industries Commissioner, Madhya Pradesh, or the officer authorised by him while issuing the eligibility certificate to the dealer. 9. It is an admitted position that certificate was issued by the Industries Commissioner on the approval and recommendation of the State Level Committee. It is, therefore, not permissible for the assessing authority to go behind the certificate and to impeach its sanctity. The certificate issued in terms of the provision made in column No. (3) of the Schedule to the notification is required to certify that such dealer is eligible for claiming exemption from payment of tax which pre-supposes that the authority issuing the certificate on the recommendation of the State Level Committee has satisfied itself that the dealer fulfils the requirements contained in clauses (a), (b) and (c) under column (1) of the Schedule to the notification. In this view of the matter, we find that the Board of Revenue was right in holding that in terms of the certificate of eligibility, the assessee was entitled to exemption of the whole of inter-State sales from tax under the Central Act, and once the eligibility certificate is issued by the competent authority, the departmental authorities are duty-bound to abide by it till the competent authority has revoked or amended the same. In the result, we find that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the dealer is eligible to avail of the exemption under the said notification dated June 29, 1982 in respect of the inter-State sales of goods manufactured by the dealer by virtue of the eligibility certificate and it was not open to taxing authorities to go behind the certificate in finding out whether or not the dealer was eligible in terms of the notification. 10. The reference is therefore answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Reference answered in favour of the assessee.