Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
Criminal Probe Can't Continue Against Unknowns Sans Prima Facie Offence: Bombay HC Quashes CBI FIR
06 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadikari Bids Empathetic Farewell to Kerala High Court
06 Mar 2026
Compensation U/S 28A LA Act Not Restricted to Foundational Award: Bombay High Court
06 Mar 2026
Karnataka HC Issues Notice on Sri Lankan Judge's Right to be Forgotten Plea for Removing Alleged Defamatory Online Content
06 Mar 2026
Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
06 Mar 2026
Shrivastava Highlights Bench-Bar Partnership in Farewell Speech
06 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Directs Urgent Monsoon Prep for Flood-Prone Kochi
06 Mar 2026
Ignoring Court-Mandated PWD Safety Report Invalidates Municipal Order: J&K&L High Court
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
S. MURALIDHAR, M. S. RAMAN
Jagdamba Polymers Pvt. Ltd. , Balasore – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT
1. Two questions have been urged by the Assessee-Dealer in the present revision petition arising from an order dated 29th January, 2015 passed by the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal (Tribunal) in S.A. No.215 (ET)/2013-14 filed by the Petitioner for the period 1st April, 2008 to 30th September, 2011. The said questions read as under:
'(i) Whether levy under Section 3 of the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999 is attracted on scheduled goods imported from outside the territory of India?
(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case levy of penalty U/s.10(2) of the Act is warranted?'
2. As far as the first question is concerned, the issue now stands settled by the decision dated 9th October 2017 of the Supreme Court of India in State of Kerala v. Fr. William Fernandez, (2021) 11 SCC 705. Consequently, the Court declines to frame question No.(i) as urged.
3. As far as the question No. (ii) is co
The absence of willful or deliberate attempt to evade payment justified the court's decision to set aside the levy of penalty under Section 10(2) of the Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a factual determination by the Assessing Authority on the levy of entry tax on goods purchased from unregistered dealers and on....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the authorities had no jurisdiction to impose entry tax on goods not mentioned in the schedule of the New Act.
The right of the Assessee to apply for a refund of any excess amount paid in accordance with the law.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of 'transit sales' and absence of material showing direct involvement in the relevant transactions, the liability under tax acts m....
Mens rea is essential for imposing penalties under tax laws; technical faults without intent to evade tax should not attract penalties.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article