This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Association challenging the levy of sales tax on Zarda within Assam at the point of first sale under the provisions of Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 w.e.f. 1.7.93. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 enacted by amalgamating, consolidating and amending the four earlier existing sales tax laws of Assam including the Act, 1947, and brought into force levy of tax on Zarda wef 1.7.93 under section 8 (1)(a) of the Act vide Entry 8 of Schedule II. Prior to the commencement of the Act, Zarda being a tobacco product was exempted from sales tax under Act, 1947 vide Entry No. 47 Schedule in (since repealed with effect from 1.7.93). The Entry 47 remained in force upto 30.6.93, till replacement of Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947. It is, therefore, contended that Zarda was exempted from sales tax under the Act, 1947 wef 14.12.57 for more than 35 years upto 30.6.93 before being subjected to tax under Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 as stated above. But tax on Zarda has been withdrawn on deletion of Entry 8 in Schedule n wef 1.5.97 by notification No.FTX 50/97/pt/2 dated 2.4.97 and exemption has been restored by deleting the words but excluding Zarda from Entry 38 of Schedule I. Thus, levy of tax on Zarda under the New Act, it is contended, remained for period of 3 years 9 months only. 3. Challenging the levy of tax on Zarda under 1993 Act, Mr. Phukan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the Tobacco Industry have been taken over by the Parliament under Entry 52 of List I the Seventh Schedule, the entire field of legislation is fully occupied by the Parliament and that States have, therefore, no power to legislate in respect of the same item in question. Phukan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the Tobacco Industry have been taken over by the Parliament under Entry 52 of List I the Seventh Schedule, the entire field of legislation is fully occupied by the Parliament and that States have, therefore, no power to legislate in respect of the same item in question. Further, it is contended that deriving power under Entry 52, the Tobacco Board Act, 1975 (Act 4 of 1975) has been enacted and taken over control of the Tobacco Industry for development of the industry in the public interest and that it is the Board which still takes care of the Tobacco Industry under the provisions of the Act, 1975, and that as Zarda is accepted as tobacco by the State of Assam under the Act, 1947 as it is under the control of Union Govt. Mr. Phukan has also submitted that once the Central Govt has taken over Tobacco Industry and passed a legislation, the State Legislatures have no jurisdiction to legislate on that subject. 4. By order dated 4.10.93, this Court stayed imposition of tax on Zarda under the Assam general Sales Tax Act, 1993. However, as/informed by Additional Senior Govt Advocate, Mr. HN Sarma, the State Govt of Assam, has been getting the share of its excise duty from the Central Govt under the provisions of the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957. The submission of Mr. Phukan is that State cannot levy sales tax on tobacco (Zarda), since levy of additional excise duty on tobacco under the Act, 1957 which is clearly in lieu of sales tax and the State is getting a proportional share thereof from the Central Govt, the State Govt is not entitled to get the share simultaneously in the additional duties of tax. 5. As stated above, the learned Govt Advocate also admitted this position. Under the Act, 1957 an additional excise duty (other than the central excise duty) is being levied on tobacco and its products and proceeds thereby are being distributed amongst the States in accordance with the Second Schedule to the Act. Such distribution is made on the condition that if any State levies any tax on sale or purchase of any of these goods, that State should not be entitled to its share of additional excise duty, except the Central Govt, by special order otherwise, directed. Such distribution is made on the condition that if any State levies any tax on sale or purchase of any of these goods, that State should not be entitled to its share of additional excise duty, except the Central Govt, by special order otherwise, directed. As admittedly, this was not done in imposing the sales tax on Zarda, the State Govt is not entitled to impose such tax in question and further entitlement to additional excise duty is only given in lieu of all state level taxes on tobacco and tobacco products. 6. In the above discussions, it was found that the impugned tax on tobacco was made only for a short period i.e. only for a period between 1.7.93 to 1.5.97 (3 years 9 months). Zarda has now been subjected to luxury tax on the rate of 10% under the Assam Taxation (on Luxuries) Act, 1997 w.e.f. 1.8.97 vide Entry 4 of Schedule to the said Act. 7. In view of the above discussion, the fact remains that, the impugned tax on Zarda was imposed for the short period between 1.7.93 to 1.5.97 and the State Govt, Assam has been getting its share under the provisions of Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957. Apparently, realizing this aspect of law, the State Govt deleted/withdrawn the levy on tax w.e.f.. 1.5.97 vide notification No.FTX 5Q/97/Pt/2. 8. During the course of the hearing, this Court directed the Govt Advocate Mr. Sarma to furnish the details of the share from Additional Excise Duties, received by the respondent No.1, the State of Assam. Copies of the 2nd Schedule and the budget receipts for the years 1991-92 to 1997-98, of the Govt of India showing distribution of additional excise duties in lieu of sales tax to each State were furnished by the petitioner which showed that the shares of the State Govt was withdrawn during this period, in lieu of tax as stated above. 9. This being the factual as well as legal position which the learned Govt Advocate also fairly conceded, I find no necessity to have elaborate discussion on the submission of both the parties. 10. In view of the foregoing discussions, I find merit in the petition, accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned imposition of levy of sales tax on Zarda under Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 is set aside. 10. In view of the foregoing discussions, I find merit in the petition, accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned imposition of levy of sales tax on Zarda under Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 is set aside. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I make no order as to costs.