ION EXCHANGE INDIA LTD Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question referred to this Full Bench in this batch of cases is whether any authority constituted under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (the Act) has in view of Section 24(7), power to grant stay of payment of the amount of tax due in accordance with the order of the Tribunal, in respect of which an application made under Section 24(1) or a reference: made inconsequence there of is pending disposal.

(2.) HAVING herd parties at length, we see a neat and clear answer to the question and that is in the negative. Section 24 reads thus: '24. Statement of case to High Court. (1) Within sixty days from the date of receipt of the copy of an order of the Tribunal under Sub -section (3) of Section 23 affecting any liability of any dealer to pay tax under this Act, such deafer or, as the case may be, the State Government, may by application in writing accompanied, when the application is made by any person other than the State Government, with a fee of one hundred rupees require the Tribunal to refer to the High Court any question of law arising out Of such order and except in cases covered under Sub -section (2) the Tribunal may, within ninety days of the receipt of such application, draw up a statement of the case and refer it to the High Court. (2) If for reason to be recorded in writing, the Tribunal refuses to make such reference, the application may, within sixty days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order of refusal. (a) withdraw his application (and if he does so, the fee paid shall be refunded), or (b) apply to the High Court against such refusal. (3) if upon the receipt of an application under Clause (b) of Sub -section (2) the High Court is not satisfied that such refusal was justified, it may require the Tribunal to state a case and refer it to the High Court and on receipt of such requisition the Tribunal shall state end refer the case accordingly. (4) If the High Court is not satisfied that the statements in a case referred under this section are sufficient to enable into determine the question raised thereby it may refer the case back to the Tribunal to make such additions thereto or alterations therein as the Court may direct in that behalf. (5) The High Court upon the. hearing of any such case. shall decide the question of law raised thereby and shall delivery its judgment thereon containing the grounds on which such; decision is founded and shall send to the Tribunal a copy of such judgment under the seal of the Court and the signature of the Registrar and the Tribunal shall dispose of the case accordingly. (6) Where reference is made to to the High Court under this section, the costs including the disposal of the fee referred to in Sub -section (1) snail be in the discretion of the Court. (7) The payment of the amount if any of tax due in accordance with the order of the Tribunal in respect of which) an application has been made under Sub -section (1) shall not be stayed pending the disposal of such application or any reference in consequence thereof but if such amount is reduced as the result of such reference the excess tax paid shall be refunded in accordance with the provisions of Section 14'.

(3.) SHRI Agarwala, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that under Section 24(7), the restriction does not operate against the Tribunal but operates only against the other authorities. There is no scope for drawing such distinction. The words are clear and they refer to the payment of the amount of tax due in accordance with the order of the Tribunal. The prohibition is total and operates against all authorities under the Act.