SHIV PRASAD SAHU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this tax revision petition though the petitioner has raised several questions, at the time of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner confined his arguments to only three questions, which are modified below :

(2.) THE background facts under which this tax revision petition has been filed are as follows : The petitioner in the present case is a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). During the relevant year he was a liquor vendor carrying on business in selling of country liquor. For the purpose of his business he purchased mohua flower out of which country liquor has been extracted. In response to a notice issued under Section 12(4) of the Act for the year 1992 -93 the petitioner appeared before the Sales Tax Officer, Kesinga (hereinafter referred to as the "Assessing Officer") and contended that during the year he purchased mohua flower weighing 4380.60 quintals. In support of his contention he produced the certificate issued by the Superintendent of Excise, who had certified that the petitioner purchased mohua flower to the extent of 4380.60 quintals. During the relevant time mohua flower was subject to tax on turnover of purchase. The Assessing Officer while completing the assessment added 10% of the quantity of mohua flower shown by the petitioner towards the driage and wastage and estimated the total quantity of purchase of mohua flower at 4818 quintals. He also estimated the purchase price of mohua flower at Rs.150/ - as against Rs.140/ - per quintal shown by the petitioner on the ground that the purchase price shown by the petitioner was not supported by any evidence. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer determined the purchase turnover of mohua flower at Rs.7,22,799/ - and levied 8% tax on such turnover while completing the assessment under Section 12(4) of the Act.

(3.) FOR determining the controversy, it is relevant to quote the definition of the terms "turnover of purchase" and