TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS INDIA LTD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference under Section 21(3) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944 (hereinafter to be referred to as the taxing statute). The taxing statute was repealed by the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947, but the proviso to Section 32 of the said Act saved all proceedings under the taxing statute. Nothing, therefore, turns upon the repeal, and this case has to be decided on the construction of the relevant provisions of the taxing statute.

(2.) I give below a brief summary of the statement of the case on which the questions of law to be decided by us are raised. The assessee is the Tobacco Manufacturers (India) Limited, Monghyr (hereinafter to be referred to as the assessee). The opposite party was originally the Province of Bihar, now the State of Bihar. The accounting period for which the assessee is assessed is the period of six moths from October, 1944, to March, 1945. The Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, Monghyr, by his order dated the 26th July, 1946, made an assessment against the assessee under Section 10(2)(b) of the taxing statute. That assessment order shows that the gross turnover, as shown by the return submitted by the assessee, was Rs. 2,81,83,119-15-8. Making a deduction under Section 5(2)(b) of the taxing statute, the taxable turnover was determined to be Rs. 2,76,19,458. On this taxable turnover, the amount of tax assessed was Rs. 4,33,116-0-6. Against this order of assessment, there was an appeal to the Commissioner of Bhagalpur Division, such appeal being provided under Section 20 of the taxing statute.

(3.) AGAINST the order of the learned Commissioner, there was an application in revision to the Board of Revenue. The Board, by its resolution dated the 7th of September, 1948, rejected the application. Then, on the 13th October, 1948, the Board was moved to make a reference to the High Court under Section 21(1) of the taxing statute on seven questions of law, which according to the assessee arose out of the order. By its order dated the 15th of May, 1949, the Board refused to make a reference on the questions formulated by the assessee, but thought that the following question should be referred to the High Court :-