ORIENT PAPER MILLS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 7th January, 1980 (annexure 9) passed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orissa, respondent No. 2 ("Commissioner" for short) in exercise of his suo motu power of revision conferred under section 23(4)(a) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act read with rule 80 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules (hereinafter referred to as the "Act" and the "Rules") by which orders passed by the Special Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orissa, on 24th May, 1978 (annexure 6 series) allowing interest to the appellant under section 14-C were set aside.

(2.) FACTS which are not in dispute are stated below. The appellant, Messrs Orient Paper Mills, a manufacturer of paper having its factory premises at Brajarajnagar, is a registered dealer under the Act and was assessed by the Sales Tax Officer, Jharsuguda (for short "S.T.O.") for the assessment years 1967-68, 1970-71 and 1971-72. On 2nd July, 1974 the Additional Sales Tax Tribunal in second appeal directed refund of tax for the year 1967-68. On 30th December, 1974 the appellant filed a refund application. On 31st January, 1975 the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Sambalpur Range, in appeal directed refund of sales tax for assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72. On 4th April, 1975 the appellant filed refund applications. The refund applications referred to above were not promptly attended to by the S.T.O., but on 15th March, 1977 he intimated the appellant by letters (annexure 1 series) that the applications were defective in certain particulars requiring rectification. On 17th March, 1977 the appellant filed a memo rectifying the defects. Thereafter on 19th March, 1977 the S.T.O. passed orders on the refund applications and made adjustments against outstanding sales tax demand payable by the appellant for the assessment years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76.

(3.) MR . B. K. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, contended that the Special Additional Commissioner disposed of the revision applications in exercise of powers delegated to him by the Commissioner under section 17 of the Act. Therefore, the Commissioner had no further jurisdiction to revise on his own motion the orders passed by the Special Additional Commissioner. Therefore, he acted wholly without jurisdiction in passing the impugned order. He further urged that according to the provisions of section 14-C of the Act, the petitioner was entitled to interest which was rightly allowed by the Special Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax.