9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (12) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of section 19(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act and the explanation given thereunder?" 3.. M/s. Orissa Modern Emporium, Keonjhar, a registered dealer under the Act, carried on business in electrical goods, sports goods, radio and its component parts. Undisputedly, the dealer sold his stock-in-trade to the opposite party who carried on business in the same line in the name and style of "M/s. Raja Stores". The Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack III Circle, Jaipur Road, served a notice on the opposite party under section 12(5) of the Act and held him liable for payment of sales tax from 21st August, 1973, i.e., the date of starting of the business, by invoking the provisions of section 19(1) of the Act treating the opposite party-firm as a transferee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without prejudice to any action that may be taken for its recovery from the transferor, be payable by the transferee as if he were a dealer liable under this Act for such tax and the transferee shall be liable to pay tax on the sales made by him on and from the date of such transfer and shall within thirty days of the transfer apply for registration under this Act unless he is already registered. Explanation.-When a dealer carries on business in the same premises substantially in the same goods in succession to a dealer liable under this Act, it shall be presumed that there has been an entire transfer of the business notwithstanding any change in the constitution, style or name of the business unless the contrary is proved by the dealer su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om the two authorities referred to in its order, but also from a Bench decision of the Patna High Court in the case of Hajipur Plywood Factory v. State of Bihar [1974] 34 STC 45 where section 20 of the Act containing exactly similar provisions as those contained in section 19 of the Orissa Act had fallen for interpretation in a somewhat similar situation. Referring to the case of Anakapalle Co-operative Agricultural and Industrial Society Ltd. v. Workmen AIR 1963 SC 1489, it was held that it must be proved that the business as a running concern was transferred and nothing substantial was kept back by the vendor. In other words, it must be established that besides the transfer of the stock-in-trade, the business assets, ordinarily and genera ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
