SATYANARAYAN BHANDAR Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE both the tax revision cases involve identical facts and raise identical questions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) IN both the tax revision cases, two questions of law were raised for consideration of this Court and out of those two questions, the learned Counsel for the petitioner argued only one. The question on which both the tax revision cases were argued is as under: Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that Robinson barley is not covered under SI. No. 33 vide notification dated June 30, 1990 and is not taxable at the first point of sale ?

(3.) IN course of such assessment proceeding, the Sales Tax Officer held that the petitioner had sold barley to the tune of Rs. 29,138.88 and Rs. 1,04,571.16 respectively for the years referred to above and claimed exemption of tax thereon on the ground of first point tax -paid goods and it was also claimed by the petitioner that purchase of Robinson barley was made inside the State of Orissa on payment of tax at the rate of four per cent. In the original assessment the exemption was allowed. But consequent upon reassessment, the Sales Tax Officer held that Robinson barley is not a medicine nor it is a cereal and is exigible to tax at the last point of sale at the rate of 12 per cent. Accordingly, demand at the rate of 12 per cent was raised in the assessment for both the years.