1995 (4) TMI 254

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... point urged is that in view of the dispute raised by the petitioner about payability of surcharge, action under section 13(4)(a) of the Act was not permissible. Learned counsel for the Revenue submits that in view of the decision of this Court in Sitania Enterprisers v. State of Orissa [1994] 92 STC 524, the first plea is unsustainable. So far as the second question is concerned, it is submitted .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n determined as the dues payable". Section 13(4)(a) does not involve any determination of tax payable by a dealer. Under section 13(4) the amount of tax due where the returns are furnished without receipt showing full payment thereof is to be paid by the dealer within thirty days from the date of service of the notice issued for the purpose. Rule 32 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947 (in short "t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ngle to the controversy also. Where the admitted tax is not paid, resort can be taken to section 13(4)(a) without any notice to the dealer to have its say. But where the dealer does not accept its liability to pay the tax (including surcharge) the situation would be different. The authorities are not helpless to deal with dealers who without sufficient cause furnish incorrect return or information .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X