JUDGMENT

B. N. Mahapatra, J. - In this tax revision petition, the petitioner has raised several questions of law, but at the time of hearing, the same are confined to the following three modified questions :

(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the reopening of the assessment under section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 is justified as no reason has been indicated in the notice issued under the said section and that the reassessment proceeding has not been initiated on change of opinion of the Sales Tax Officer ?

(ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, is correct in holding that the subsequent sale effected by the petitioner to the Orissa Power Generation Corporation and the National Thermal Power Corporation is not in course of inter-State sale but intra-State sale and does not qualify for exemption as contemplated in section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?

(iii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer is not justified to impose penalty under section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act ?

The background in which this tax revision case has been filed is as follows :

The petitioner in this case is one Voltas Limited (hereinafter called, "the dealer") registered under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 ("the OST Act") and under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ("the CST Act"). It is engaged in different activities inside the State of Orissa. During the year 1993-94 the dealer supplied six circulating water pumps to OPGC on the basis of a contract entered into between the dealer and Orissa Power Generation Corporation (for short, "OPGC"). The dealer also supplied some air-conditioners on the basis of supply of contract to National Thermal Power Corporation (for short, "NTPC") and has also made a separate contract with NTPC for erection, commissioning, etc., of air-conditioning system. During the said year, the dealer disclosed its gross turnover under the OST Act at Rs. 7,50,31,028.24 which has been revised by filing annual return on December 22, 1994 for Rs. 7,49,74,817.24 from which a deduction of Rs. 3,96,32,784.17 was claimed on account of turnover under the CST Act and Rs. 3,53,42,033.47 was disclosed as gross turnover under the OST Act. The deduction of Rs. 3,96,32,784.17 claimed under the OST Act has been shown in the annual return filed under the CST Act claiming exemption under section 6(2) read with section 3(b) of the CST Act as "sale in transit". The Sales Tax Officer (hereinafter called as, "the assessing officer") while completing assessment under section 12(4) of the OST Act had excluded the sales turnover of Rs. 3,96,32,784 from the total turnover and determined gross turnover at Rs. 3,53,42,033.07 and raised a demand of Rs. 13,18,351 against which the petitioner preferred first appeal. The first appellate authority allowed the appeal by reducing the demand vide its order dated July 27, 1996. While completing the assessment under the CST Act, the assessing officer disallowed the dealer's claim of exemption under section 6(2) of the CST Act. Against the said order the dealer preferred first appeal which is still pending. On the very same day of passing of the assessment order under the CST Act, i.e., October 11, 1995, the assessing officer issued notice under section 12(8) of the OST Act for reopening of the assessment under the OST Act. At this stage, the dealer objected to reopening of the assessment on the point of maintainability on the ground that a first appeal against the order passed under section 12(4) of the OST Act was pending before the first appellate authority and this court in O.J.C. No. 7632 of 1992 directed to consider the objection on the maintainability point. However, the assessing officer completed the assessment under section 12(8) of the OST Act on the entire turnover of Rs. 7,49,74,817.24. According to the assessing officer, during the year under consideration, the dealer claim