9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 919X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese issues time and again. It was equally not opened to the authorities below to revisit the issues. All that the impugned orders do is to re-compute the tax liability on the basis of the order of the Supreme Court. This Court is not inclined to interfere with either of the impugned orders. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. - W. P. (C) No. 7227 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2022 - THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. S. MURALIDHAR And JUSTICE R. K. PATTANAIK For the Petitioners : Mr. P. Patnaik , Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Mr. S. S. Padhy , Additional Standing Counsel ORDER 1. The challenge in the present petition is to an order dated 24th January 2008 of re-computation passed by the Sales Tax Officer (STO), Rour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act, 1947 (OST Act) as well as the CST Act. The Petitioners state that it sent goods to various branches/agents in other States taking into account the market conditions in the respective States. The branch/agents which took physical delivery of such goods stored them in their godowns. The Petitioners and its agents regularly supplied and sold goods to government undertakings like National Minerals Development Corporation (NMDC), Coal India Ltd. (CIL). Because of greater bargaining power, the CIL is said to have fixed rates at which explosives, detonators etc. would be supplied to itself and various subsidiaries companies. In turn, the said branches/agents sold the quantity of explosives to the subsidiary companies out of the stock lying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le. Accordingly, the Petitioners were held entitled to claim deduction under Section 6-A of the CST Act in respect of transactions with CIL. 6. The Petitioners contend that the Supreme Court by its judgment dated 16th November 2007, held that the deeming provision should be given its full effect and that the assessment could be reopened only in the instances of fraud, misrepresentation or collusion. Once Form-F is accepted, the inter-State transfer of goods is deemed to be a stock transfer. The contention of the Petitioners is that if the transactions are declared to be inter-State sales, then Form-C should have been accepted. It is also contended that opportunity ought to have been given to the Petitioners to produce such C Forms and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he counter affidavit sets out in a tabular column in para-9, the basis of re-computation. 8. The Opposite Party State has pointed out that earlier W.P.(C) Nos.2503 to 2510 of 2008 had been filed by the Petitioners in this Court which were dismissed by this Court on 10th April 2008 as withdrawn leaving all questions open and clarifying that the said dismissal would not prevent the Petitioners from approaching any other forum in accordance with law . Thereafter an Article 32 petition was filed directly by the Petitioners in the Supreme Court being Writ Petition (Civil) No.515 of 2008. Again, this petition was withdrawn by the Petitioners and the Supreme Court passed an order on 17th November 2008 recording the statement of counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
