RAMACHANDRA SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE statement of case was called for under Section 24(3) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on the following questions :

(2.) BAIRAGI Sahoo, father of the dealer, was carrying on the business of sale in kora and khai in Bhubaneswar. He died leaving behind five sons of whom the dealer is the eldest. Other sons are carrying on their business at other places but the dealer carries on business of sale in kora and khai in the same place where his father was residing. He has given trade name of his business as 'Baya Kora and Khai'.

(3.) AS appears from the case stated to this Court, the dealer carries on business of sale in kora and khai at Badadanda, but has not been registered. The dealer inherited the business from his father after the latter's death. The Inspector visited the business premises when dealer gave statement on July 28, 1972. The Sales Tax Officer relied upon the report of the Inspector and estimated the daily average of sale at Rs. 85 for the entire year 1973 -74. Aggrieved by the same an appeal was filed where also the assessment was confirmed. In second appeal a ground was taken to the effect that opportunity was not given to the dealer by the Sales Tax Officer to explain the report of the Inspector. However, at the stage of argument, no such submission was made. Accordingly, the order of assessment was also confirmed in the second appeal.