STATE OF BIHAR Vs. TELU RAM JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case is stated by the Board of Revenue under Section 25(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (Act XIX of 1947) at the instance of the assessee Telu Ram Jain.

(2.) WHILE making certain enquiries under Section 13(5) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, the Sales Tax Officer, Dhanbad, discovered that the assessee, who was employed as a contractor at Sindri, had received in the year 1947-48 a sum of Rs. 4,94,000 and odd on account of the execution of contracts from the Central Public Works Department. In spite of his being employed in the execution of contracts the assessee had not applied for registration; nor did he pay sales tax from the 1st of April, 1948. After examining the accounts of the assessee the Sales Tax Officer made as assessment of sales tax to the extent Rs. 14,000 for the first three quarters of 1947-48. The assessment order was made on the 31st of March, 1949. Aggrieved by this order of assessment Telu Ram Jain preferred two appeals to the Commissioner of Sales Tax. The appeals were dismissed on the 8th of October, 1949. Thereafter, the assessee applied for revision before the Board of Revenue by two separate petitions. The Board of Revenue heard the parties on the 1st of March, 1950, and rejected the petitions by an order dated the 5th of March, 1950. The assessee then filed two applications to the Board of Revenue for making a reference to the High Court on certain questions of law mentioned therein. The applications were filed on the 31st of July, 1950. The Board of Revenue heard lawyers of the parties on the 7th of April, 1951, and made the present reference under Section 25(1) of the Act on the 19th of June, 1951.

(3.) WHEN the argument of the case commenced Mr. Gopal Prasad, who appears on behalf of the Advocate-General, raised a preliminary objection that the application filed by the assessee under Section 25(1) of the Act was not maintainable on the ground that it was not made within 90 days of the passing of the order in revision by the Board of Revenue. It was submitted by the learned counsel that if this preliminary question was decided in favour of the Department, it was not necessary for the High Court to examine or determine the other questions of law formulated in the statement of the case. The question of limitation is the first question of law which is formulated by the Board of Revenue, and we propose to examine this question at the outset.