SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1972 Supreme(Ori) 78

B.K.RAY, R.N.MISRA
RAM CHANDRA BADRINARAYAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R. Mohanty and N. Patra, for the petitioner.
The Standing Counsel (S.T.), for the opposite party.

JUDGMENT

R. N. MISRA, J. - This is a reference under section 24(3) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This court called upon the Tribunal to refer to the following question of law and state a case for determination of the said question :

"Whether the proviso to section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) has been violated by sale of mung and chana in the shape of mung dal and besan ?"

2. The assessee is a registered dealer bearing No. CUI 1318. When he came to be assessed for the quarter ending 30th June, 1963, the Sales Tax Officer found that the petitioner had purchased mung, chana, biri and peas by giving declaration as required under the Act that he would resell such goods in the State of Orissa and had thus been exempted from payment of sales tax. Subsequently, he converted some mung and biri to dal. Similarly, he converted chana and peas to besan. To the extent the assessee converted the goods purchased on the basis of declaration into either dal or besan the assessing officer took action under the proviso to section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the Act and raised demand. The assessee disputed the demand in appeal. From the appellate order it transpires that similar demands ha



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top