9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (6) TMI 209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a demands of sales tax, during pendency of reference applications under section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (in short "the Act"), for the assessment years 1984-85 and 1986-87. The petitioner was assessed under the provisions of the Act and the Orissa Additional Sales Tax Rules, 1975 (in short "the Rules"). Total demand raised against the petitioner was little above rupees two crores seventeen lakhs. A Full Bench of the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal upheld the levy of the tax on the petitioner. Petitioner has filed applications for reference to this Court. The petitioner moved the Commissioner of Sales Tax for stay, taking a stand that receipts by corporation-petitioner did not amount to taxable receipts and in any event, the provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erference in the writ applications. On a perusal of the order, I find that petitioner's submission relating to non-taxability of the transaction and desirability of granting full stay has not been adequately dealt with. Though at the time of disposing of the application for stay, the concerned authority is not required to elaborately detail the reasons, as held by this Court in the case of Tata Robins Fraser Limited v. Sales Tax Officer [1989] 75 STC 277, the order has to indicate whether various points urged have been considered. It has to indicate application of mind. If the authority refuses to grant stay, the order should ex facie disclose why he declined to grant stay. [See [1973] 32 STC 464 (Mad.) (Chesebrough Pond's Inc. v. Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved if the matter is heard afresh by the Commissioner. The petitioner is permitted to file additional applications elaborating the grounds of challenge and the germane factors. If the petitioner makes such an application by June 22, 1990, the Commissioner shall rehear the matter and dispose of the same by July 9, 1990. As an interim measure, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 by the end of June, 1990. The order of attachment which is stated to have been issued, will remain inoperative till disposal of the matter by the Commissioner afresh. Needless to say that the order of the Commissioner as contained in annexure 3 is inoperative, because he has been asked to reconsider the matter. The writ applications and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
