9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment and the order of penalty. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, petitioner filed Second Appeal No. 159 of 1980-81 before the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa. By order dated September 16, 1981 the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, allowed the appeal in part and directed the assessing officer to make reassessment keeping in view the direction given by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax in the connected first appeal and also keeping in view the observations made by the Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 159 of 1980-81. By the said order dated September 16, 1981 in Second Appeal No. 159 of 1980-81, the Sales Tax Tribunal also directed that the extra tax and penalty if paid be refunded. Pursuant to the said ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax in the suo motu revision and the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orissa, in the revision filed by the petitioner, the petitioner has filed this writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution with a prayer to quash the said orders. 2.. Mr. S. Ray, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax and the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orissa, failed to appreciate that the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Orissa v. Orissa Cement Ltd. [1986] 61 STC 79; AIR 1986 SC 178 was on section 14-A of the Act which provided that refund can be claimed only by the person from whom the dealer has actually realised any amount of tax. He further submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e law as was applicable for the period 1974-75 will hold good. According to Mr. Mohanty, since section 14-A of the Act was in force for the year 1974-75, the tax amount now claimed by way of refund having been collected from the customers of the petitioner is not payable to the petitioner in view of the provisions of section 14-A of the Act as has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa v. Orissa Cement Ltd. [1986] 61 STC 79; AIR 1986 SC 178. Mr. Mohanty, further submitted that in any case the petitioner has collected the tax amount from its customers and this Court in exercise of its powers under article 226 of the Constitution should not direct refund of the amount to the petitioner so as to make the petitioner undul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sc. Case No. 410 of 2002. It appears from the said memorandum filed by Mr. K.N. Jena, and the documents annexed thereto as well as the copy of the show cause reply filed by Sri Ajit Kumar Tripathy, the then Principal Secretary to the Government, Finance Department, Bhubaneswar in Original Criminal Misc. Case No. 410 of 2002 that a Consumer Welfare Fund in the State of Orissa has been created with the approval of the State Cabinet. Mr. Ashok Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel (CT), however stated that from the copies of the documents filed along with the memorandum, it is not clear as to whether the Consumer Welfare Fund has already become operational. 6.. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions made by Mr. Jena and Mr. Mohanty, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
