SALAT FOOD INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN effect, in this writ petition, what is claimed is that the petitioner is entitled to compel the opposite parties to give effect to the promises held out to the petitioner under Industrial Policy Resolution - 1992. (IPR -92 for short). The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in OJC No. 3748 of 2000 in essence claiming that it is entitled to exemption from sales tax in the light of IPR -92. By order dated 29.6.2000, the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. The question whether the petitioner is entitled to any exemption from sales tax would depend upon whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of any exemption under the notification issued under Seetion 6 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (in short, the 'Act'). This position is clear from the decision of the Supreme -Court in Sales Tax Officer and Anr., v. Shree Durga Oil Mills and Anr., AIR 1998 SC 591. In the light of this, it is for the petitioner to make the claim before the assessing authority and in case the assessing authority does not uphold the claim pursue it before the appellate authority constituted under the Act. We do not think it proper or necessary to go into the merits of the claim raised by the petitioner in this writ petition.

(2.) WE feel that in matters relating to assessment unaer the Orissa Sales Tax Act, it is not proper for this Court to jump into the fray just after an order of assessment is passed or even while proceedings for assessment are pending, and to deflect the proper course of assessment in terms of the Act, to be properly scrutinized by the appellate authorities constituted under the respective enactments. We make this observation in view of the tendency found to rush to this Court against notices, preceding assessments and against orders of assessment without pursuing the statutory remedies, against the orders of the first appellate authority without invoking the jurisdiction of the second appellate authority, and by filing writ petitions against second appellate orders under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, even though a clear statutory remedy by way of revision to this Court is provided. Articles 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India cannot be a short -cut or cure -all for all ills when the Statutes themselves establish competent fora to efficaciously deal with the grievances of the assessees at different stages. After all, it is the statutory authority that should ultimately decide those questions or complete the assessment.

(3.) ON the whole, we are not satisfied that any interference by this Court is warranted at this stage.