ORIENTAL CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two references made by the Sales Tax Tribunal under section 24 (1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act of 1947 at the instance of the assessee. The following two questions have been referred for opinion of the Court :

(2.) THE assessee is a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act and bears registration certificate No. R. L. C. 660. It manufactures and sells pharmaceuticals and chemicals and has it place of business within the Industrial Estate of Rourkela. During the year 1969-70, the assessee purchased goods from M/s. Sarabhai Chemicals and others and had a sales turnover of Rs. 18,191. 77 though transfer of documents of title to the goods while the same were still in transit. The assessee, however, did not produce the declarations in form C and the certificates in form E-1 before the assessment was completed in spite of the requirement to so produce before the assessing officer. For the year, it had also shown inter-State sale in respect of Rs. 885. 55 and had paid concessional rate of tax at 3 per cent, though the declaration in form C was not produced to support the claim for concessional rate. The Sales Tax Officer, in the circumstances, raised a demand on the turnover of Rs. 18,191. 77 and assessed the turnover of Rs. 885. 55 at the usual rate rejecting the claim for being assessed at the concessional rate. For the year 1970-71, the assessee had effected inter-State sale to the tune of Rs. 10,169. 04 and had supported the transactions by declarations in form C. It, however, claimed exemption under section 6 (2) (b) of the Central Sales Tax Act in respect of a turnover of Rs. 85,416. 52. In spite of opportunity being given by the assessing officer, appropriate declarations in form C were not produced and, therefore, the Sales Tax Officer disallowed the claim and proceeded to tax the turnover.

(3.) IN the second appeals before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that the explanation offered before the first appellate authority should have been accepted and the forms should have been received and consequential benefits should have been given. The Tribunal dealt with the matter and found against the assessee by saying :