ITC LTD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the judgment dated 18.7.89 (Annexure-10), passed by the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, Patna, in Revision Case No. TBH 151 to 157 of 1988 (ITC Limited v. State of Bihar), whereby the revision applications preferred by the present Petitioner under the provisions of Section 31 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), read with the Bihar Sales Tax Rules 1959 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), have been dismissed. It is further directed against the judgment dated 5.5.95 (Annexure-1), passed by the Tribunal in exercise of its review jurisdiction.

(2.) A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the writ petition may be indicated. The Petitioner is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, having its registered office at Calcutta. It is, inter alia, engaged in the manufacture and marketing of tobacco products including cigarette. One of its manufacturing units is situate at Basdeopur, in the township of Munger, in this State. The present proceedings are with respect to the assessment years 1966-67 to 1972-73. The Petitioner's factory at Munger manufactures cigarettes and packs the same in multi-layer packings and paper board. The main packing immediately protecting the cigarettes are known as 'shell'. It had during the periods in question purchased these packing materials from Rohtas Industries Limited, a public limited company with its factories at Dalmianagar, in the then district of Shahabad. In exercise of the powers conferred on the State Government by the proviso to Section 5 of the Act, it had issued notification No. STG L.J. 24/66-- 1411, F.T., dated the 12th February, 1966, published in the official gazette, whereby the point of payment and collection of special sales tax within the meaning of Section 5 of the Act was altered.

(3.) While assailing the validity of the impugned order, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that none of the three orders adverted to hereinabove, have noticed the aforesaid notification dated 12.2.1966, which has had brought about sea-change in the-law governing the issue in hand. He submits on instructions that the notification was brought to the notice of the three authorities notwithstanding which the same has not been noticed and it is, therefore, a case of misdirection. He next submits that the authorities have relied upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in ITC Limited v. Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, 1986 62 STC 149, which on the face of it is inapplicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case because those dealt with periods prior to the issuance of the notification. He has also made elaborate submissions with respect to the scope, content, and the sweep of Section 7(2)(b) of the Act, read with Rule 8 as well as form Nos. 9 and 9C which, in his submission, are inapplicable to the facts and circumstances of this case.