JAGANNATH COTTON COMPANY Vs. STATE GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a small-scale industrial unit engaged in "processing" (or re-cycling) of "waste cotton". In O. J. C. No. 1166 of 1992, it has challenged the order of reassessment under section 12 (8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the assessment year 1989-90 and the notices issued under section 12 (8) of the Act have been challenged in O. J. C. Nos. 6, 162, 181 and 182 of 1993. Earlier, all these cases were heard together and by judgment dated July 29, 1994 [reported as Jagannath Cotton Company v. State of Orissa [1995] 96 STC 291 (Orissa)], the writ applications were disposed of. The order of reassessment impugned in O. J. C. No. 1166 of 1992 and the notices impugned in other writ petitions were set aside on a finding that the order of reassessment was illegal. The earlier judgment is reported in [1995] 96 STC 291 (Orissa) (Jagannath Cotton Company v. State of Orissa ). Against the aforesaid judgment, the Commissioner of Sales Tax and the Sales Tax Officer, Sambalpur (opposite parties 2 and 3) filed appeals in the Supreme Court which were numbered as Civil Appeal Nos. 6627 to 6631 of 1995. Ultimately, the appeals were allowed and the cases were remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration in the light of the observations made in the judgment of the Supreme Court, reported in [1995] 99 STC 83 (Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orissa v. Jagannath Cotton Company ). The relevant portions of the judgment of the Supreme Court are extracted hereunder :

(2.) AFTER the matter came back on remand, the petitioner has filed further affidavit on November 17, 1995 in support of its contention describing the manufacturing process employed in the unit. No further counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite party No. 1 or opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3.

(3.) SINCE the provisions of the I. P. R. have been quoted in the previous judgment of this Court (Jagannath Cotton Company v. State of Orissa [1995] 96 STC 291) as well as of the Supreme Court (Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Jagannath Cotton Company [1995] 99 STC 83), it is not necessary to reproduce the same. So far as the latter question is concerned, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties 2 and 3 has fairly submitted that practically there is no difference or inconsistency between the provisions of the Industrial Policy Resolution and the Orissa Sales Tax Act. So, the latter question need not detain us.