SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.P. SEN, E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND R.B. MISRA, JJ.
Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd., and another, Petitioners
Versus
State of Orissa and anothers, Respondents.
Spl. Leave Petn. (Civil) Nos. 4513-14 of 1983 and Writ Petn. No. 3363-64 of 1983, D/- 13-4-1983.*
WITH
Pinaki Sengupta, Petitioner v. State of Orissa and others, Respondents.
Advocates appeared
Mr. S. R. Banerjee and Mr. Vinoo Bhagat, Advocates, for Petitioners, in S. L. P. Mr. Vinoo Bhagat, Advocate for Petitioner in W. P. Mr. F. S. Nariman, Sr. Advocate, Mr. V. S. Desai, Sr. Advocate, Mr. R. K. Mehta, Advocate with them for Respondent in S. L. P. Mr. S K. Mehta, Advocate, for Respondent in W. P.
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 - Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 - Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 - Section 12 and 23 - Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, 1957 - Rule 15 - Order of assessment - Sales Tax – Challenged - Petitioners for assessment year in relation to assessment of tax on sales in course of inter-State trade and commerce under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and inside sales effected during year in question under Orissa Sales Tax, 1947 - Provisions contained in Rule 12 (5) of Rules and in sub-sec. (4) of Section 12 of Act enjoin affording of reasonable opportunity to dealer for completion of assessment - Learned Sales Tax Officer observes that he gave repeated opportunities to petitioners to get themselves ready for assessment of tax and to produce their account books and other documents but they sought adjournments on one pretext or another - Eventually on learned Sales Tax Officer refused to grant any further adjournment holding that petitioners had sufficient opportunity and accordingly proceeded to best judgment - After allowing an adjustment paid by petitioners along with quarterly return, learned Sales Tax Officer has raised a demand for payment of a sum - He disallowed their claim for deduction representing sales to registered dealers and departments of Government as well as ofclaimed as deduction on account of tax collected from purchasers as requisite declarations in Form C were not forthcoming - Held, petitioners have right to prefer an appeal before prescribed authority under sub-s. (1) of S. 23 of Act - If petitioners are dissatisfied with decision in the appeal, they can prefer a further appeal to Tribunal under sub-s. (3) of S. 23 of the Act, and then ask for a case to be stated upon a question of law for opinion of High Court under S. 24 of the Act - Act provides for a complete machinery to challenge an order of assessment, and impugned orders of assessment can only be challenged by mode prescribed by Act and not by a petition - Petitioners are at liberty to make an application for stay of disputed amount and Commissioner will decide whether or not there should be such stay on such terms and conditions as he thinks fit, looking to nature of demand raised in facts and circumstances of present case - Petitions must fail and are dismissed - Court hope and trust that Appellate Authority will dispose of appeals as expeditiously as possible., appearing on behalf of State of Orissa fairly stated that he has no objection to appeal being heard as early as possible without any objection as to limitation - Petitions dismissed.
Judgment
SEN, J.:- These two special leave petitions are directed against an order of the Orissa High Court dated March 18, 1983 dismissing the writ petitions filed by the petitioners in limine challenging the two orders of assessment passed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack II Circle, Cuttack dated February 16, 1983. The connected petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution are by an officer of the Company challenging the two orders of assessment.
2. By one of the writ petitions, the petitioners challenged the validity of the order of assessment under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the assessment year 1980-81 passed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack II Circle, Cuttack dated February 16, 1983 under Rule 15 of the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, 1957 treating the gross turnover of Rs. 7,13,94,903.63 p. as returned by the petitioners to be their taxable turnover and the tax payable thereon at 10 per cent at Rs. 71,39,490.36 p. By the other the petitioners challenged the validity of an order of assessment under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 for the assessment year 1980-81 passed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack II Circle, Cuttack dated February 16, 1983 under sub-section (4) of Sec. 12 of -the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 treating the gross turnover of Rs. 2,02,07,852.65 p. as returned by the petitioners to be their taxable turnover and the tax payable thereon at 7 per cent at Rs. 14,14,549.71 p.
3. It appears from the impugned orders of assessment that proceedings under Rule 12 (5) of the Central Sales Tax (Orissa) Rules, 1057 ("Rules" for short) and under sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 12 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 ("Act" for short) were initiated against the petitioners for the assessment year 1980-81 in relation to assessment of tax on sales in the course of inter-State trade and commerce under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and inside sales effected during the year in question under the Orissa Sales Tax, 1947. The provisions contained in Rule 12 (5) of the Rules and in sub-sec. (4) of Section 12 of the Act enjoin the affording of reasonable opportunity to the dealer for completion of assessment. The learned Sales Tax Officer observes that he gave repeated opportunities to the petitioners to get themselves ready for the assessment of tax and to produce their account books and other documents but they sought adjournments on one pretext or another. Eventually on February 16, 1983 the learned Sales Tax Officer refused to grant any further adjournment holding that the petitioners had sufficient opportunity and accordingly proceeded to best judgment under Rule 15 of the Rules and sub-section (4) of Section 12 of the Act. In the absence of any material, the learned Sales Tax Officer made an assessment under Rule 15 of the Rules treating the gross turnover of sales in the course of inter-State trade and commerce amounting to Rs. 7,13,94,903.63p. as returned by the petitioners under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 to be their taxable turnover and the tax payable thereon at 10 per cent at Rs. 71,39,490.36 p. After allowing an adjustment of Rupees 27,88,388.47p. paid by the petitioners along with the quarterly return, the learned Sales Tax Officer has raised a demand for payment of a sum of Rs. 43, 51, 101.89p. He disallowed their claim for deduction of Rs. 6,74,99,085.65 p. representing sales to registered dealers and departments of Government as well as of Rs. 28,24,224.42 p. claimed as deduction on account of tax collected from purchasers as the requisite declarations in Form C were not forthcoming. He also disallowed the concessional rate of tax at 4 per cent. Similarly, while making an assessment under sub-sec. (4) of Section 12 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, he treated the gross turnover of inside sales amounting to Rupees 2,02,07,852.65p. as returned by the petitioners to be their taxable turnover and the tax payable thereon at 7 per cent at Rs. 14,14,549.71 p. After allowing an adjustment of
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.