SANJAY SINHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRIOR to 10th November, 2006 tax liability was multi -point. From 10th November, 2006 it became single point. Previously the rate of tax was 41%. Subsequently, it became 50%. State Beverage Corporation Limited used to purchase India made foreign liquor from manufacturers. It thereupon used to sell the same to, amongst others, the petitioner. For the purchase made by it, it was required to pay tax at the rate 41% of the value of the goods purchased by it to the manufacturers. While selling the same to the petitioner it used to add its profit to the cost of acquisition and on the value addition thus made it used to charge 41% from the petitioner in addition to the cost of acquisition and its profit. This went on smoothly up to 9th November, 2006. The same system was followed even on 10th, 11th. 12th. 13th and 14th November, 2006 inasmuch as State Beverage Corporation Limited only on 14th November, 2006 came to learn that the State Government has changed the multiple system of taxing to single point system of taxing and has raised the percentage of tax to 50%. The State Beverage Corporation Limited is insisting upon the petitioner to pay the difference in between 41% to 50% for the sale effected by it on 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th and 14th November, 2006 as a condition precedent for issuance of Form D -III to the petitioner in respect of the sales effected by it to the petitioner on and from 15th November, 2006.

(2.) IT is the contention of the State Beverage Corporation Limited that it has paid the differential amount of tax to the Sales Tax Department. The liability, if any, of the State Beverage Corporation Limited on account of Sales Tax was to the Manufacturer and not to the Sales Tax Department. Be that as it may, on the basis of this dispute State Beverage Corporation Limited is not entitled to refuse to issue statutory Form to which the petitioner is otherwise entitled to. There is no dispute as regards sales effected on and from 15th November, 2006 and the petitioner is seeking statutory Form D -lll for the sales effected on and from 15th November, 2006. In this connection petitioner has relied upon a decision of a Division Bench of this Court rendered in CWJC No. 8782 of 1994 (M/s Janta Khadi Bhandar V/s. State of Bihar & Ors.) dated 23rd May, 1995 whereby and under the Division Bench has held that when there is a statutory obligation of furnishing a Form in relation to a sale effected, it is not permissible to withhold furnishing of such Form as a measure to compel the person entitled to such Form to accede to what the person obliged to supply such Form is contending. We, therefore, allow the writ petition by directing the State Beverage Corporation Limited to furnish to the petitioner Form D -lll in relation to the sales effected by it to the petitioner on and from 15th November, 2006 without insisting for payment of the differential tax, as mentioned above. The writ petition is thus disposed of. It goes without saying that this order will not stand in the way of the State Beverage Corporation Limited to recover any amount including those mentioned above if the same is due and payable by the petitioner to it by taking such recourse to law as it may be advised. Let the Forms, as above, be issued as quickly as possible but not later than two months from the date of service of a copy of this order upon the Corporation.