Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1960 (7) TMI 57

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erred under section 29 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act. (c) Whether in the circumstances of this case the Sales Tax Department having sent a letter, in No.7(b) of 2nd January, 1950, directing non-realisation of sales tax from Sinclair Murray Co. from 12th December, 1949, the petitioner is liable to pay tax. (d) Whether in view of the provisions of law as laid down in section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act as it stood at the relevant time when the purchase and resale by the purchasing dealer are admitted, it is obligatory to produce any declaration in writing. 2.. The facts found and admitted are as follows: The petitioner was a registered dealer in jute for the period in question (1949-50). He sold jute to two firms, namely M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act and of rule 27(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules have been fully discussed. There I have pointed that the substantive right to claim exemption and the liability to pay sales tax on the part of the purchasing dealer arise out of the provisions of section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Act and the proviso to that subclause, and that rule 27(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules is only a rule of evidence which is not meant to be exhaustive, and which is intended for the benefit of the selling dealer; and it is open to all parties to adduce other evidence with a view to bring the transactions within the scope of section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Act, even though the declaration mentioned in rule 27(2) may not be forthcom .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at there can be no estoppel against statute, nor can the Assistant Sales Tax Officer's erroneous view about non-liability to pay sales tax be said to be binding on the Sales Tax Department. The petitioner ought to have satisfied himself about the correct interpretation of the statutory provisions before allowing the goods to be sold without collecting sales tax thereon. 7.. Mr. J. K. Mohanty, for the petitioner, contended that during the relevant period, neither in section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Act nor in rule 27(2) of the rules were the words "in Orissa" found and that those words were subsequently inserted by appropriate amendments. Hence he urged that if the goods were sold to the purchasing dealer for resale wherever it may be, the selli .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... candidate was eligible for the college course was a representation of fact. It had nothing to do with the construction of a statutory provision. Again, in the English case also there was no wrong representation regarding a statutory provision. An officer of the Army was informed by the War Office that his disability "has been accepted as attributable to military service". This was a mixed question of law and fact. On the basis of this assurance the officer concerned did not take further steps to establish that his disability was due to military service. Subsequently when the Crown repudiated the assurance of the War Office and held that the disability was not due to military service, the King's Bench Division held that the Crown was bound b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation because even a decision on a question of law given by a sales tax authority will not operate as a bar to an assessment being reopened and revised by the competent authority if it considers that that view of the law was wrong. As pointed out in a Full Bench decision of the Andhra High Court reported in State of Andhra v. Arisetti Sriramulu[1957] 8 S.T.C.153., an order of assessment fixing liability to tax does not operate as res judicata or estoppel so as to prevent that order from being reopened in assessments for subsequent years. Even in respect of the same year's assessment there are express provisions in the statute conferring power on the assessing authority to revise the same, so that any tax that might have escaped assessment m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates