9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 387X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Sales Tax (ACST), Sambalpur in AA 672 of 1987-88 confirming the assessment made under Section 12(8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (OST Act) by the Sales Tax Officer, Sambalpur I Circle, Sambalpur for the year 1984-85. 2. By an order dated 6th March, 1998 the Tribunal has, in an application, filed under Section 24(1) of the OST Act referred to three questions for consideration by this Court of which the following question is taken up first for hearing: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the proceeding in Second Appeal is not vitiated on account of association and/or order being passed by Accounts Members-I who earlier had passed an order in the self same case in Revision." 3. The background f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the coram as including Sri B.D. Pattnaik as Accounts Member-I in a three Judge Bench, which included its Chairman and Judicial Member. 6. This Court has heard the submissions of Mr. Sidhartha Ray, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri S.S. Padhy, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the Department. 7. It was argued by Sri Padhy that the order passed earlier by Sri Pattanaik was in a stay application whereas the final order was in the appeal itself. Therefore, according to him, the plea of bias is not well-founded. 8. The issue is about likelihood of bias and not actual bias. As explained in J. Mohapatra & Company v. State of Odisha AIR 1984 SC 1572, the governing rule as explained in A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India 1970(1) SCR 457 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... djudicating, as may a bare liability to costs where the decision itself will involve no pecuniary loss." 9. On the above short ground, the impugned order dated 17th December, 1996 passed by the Tribunal in S.A. No.1727 of 1990-91 is hereby set aside. The question framed is answered in favour of the Assessee-Dealer (Petitioner) in the affirmative by holding that the proceedings in the second appeal stood vitiated on account of the Accounts Member-I, who had earlier passed an order in the same case at the interlocutory stage being a member of the Tribunal. 10. SA No.1727 of 1990-91 is restored to the file of the Tribunal for being proceeded with, in accordance with law. The matter now be listed before the Tribunal on 6th June, 2022 on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
