9911796707
TMI Blog1952 (12) TMI 26X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case for carefully checking the account and finding out the goods despatched outside Bihar and then deducting the amount represented by such goods from the gross turnover and then determining the taxable turnover. On remand the learned Sales Tax Officer for the reasons stated in his revised assessment order dated the 1st November, 1947 (Exhibit D) held that the claim for deduction on account of despatches outside Bihar remained unsubstantiated and was thus disallowed. The assessee then preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bhagalpur Division, by petition dated the 22nd December, 1947 (Exhibit E) (bearing Case No. 138 of 1947-48) against the said revised assessment order. The learned Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bhagalpur Division (Mr. C.K. Raman) agreeing with the findings of the lower court, by his order dated the 18th February, 1948, summarily dismissed the appeal (Exhibit F). A revision petition was filed on the 6th February, 1948, (Exhibit G) on behalf of the Province of Bihar against the order dated 16th August, 1947, of the Commissioner, Mr. R. P. N. Sahi, regarding the interpretation of Section 5(2)(a)(v) and application of Section 2(g) of the Biha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) Are sales by assessee to the Imperial Tobacco Company of India Limited, Tobacco Manufacturers (India) Limited and Indian Leaf Tobacco Development Company Limited sales to "a registered dealer " within the meaning of Section 5(2)(a)(ii) of Act VI of 1944? Is it legally justifiable to regard such sales as sales other than " sales to a registered dealer"? The petition in Case No. 472 of 1948 was directed against the order of the Board relating to revision petition filed on behalf of the assessee. Another petition bearing Case No. 493 of 1948 was also filed on 22nd November, 1949 (Exhibit K) for reference to the High Court on the follow- ing two questions of law (1) Had the Province of Bihar any right to submit an application to the Board of Revenue under Section 24 (4) of Act XIX of 1947 for revi- sion of the order of 16th August, 1947, passed by the Commissioner of Bhagalpur? (2) Was the application for revision of the order of 16th August, 1947, submitted to the Board of Revenue by the Province of Bihar on or after 3rd February, 1948, barred by limitation? This petition was directed against the order of the Board so far as it related to revision petition filed on behalf of the Pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gnors in most of the cases were Messrs. Tobacco Manufacturers (India) Ltd., and not Messrs. Printers (India) Ltd., even though in a small number of cases, the consignors are Messrs. Printers (India) Ltd. On these considerations the Board was of opinion that another opportunity should be given to Messrs. Printers (India) Ltd., to produce evidence showing the amount of despatches from Chandisthan and Monghyr made by them and Messrs. Tobacco Manufactur- ers (India), Ltd., to places outside Bihar and to place their claim before the Sales Tax Officer for the purpose of bearing as to whether or not they are entitled to deduction under Section 5(2)(a)(ii) or under Section 5(2)(a)(v). Until the further enquiry ordered by the Board is complete and all the relevant papers are examined by the Sales Tax Officer, the Board cannot give an opinion as to whether the deduction of Rs. 30,68,601 under either Section 5(2)(a)(ii) or 5(2)(a)(v) is valid and justified. P.R. Das and S.N. Bhattacharya, for the assessee. Lalnarain Sinha, for the Province of Bihar. JUDGMENT RAMASWAMI and SARJOO PROSAD, JJ.-This case comes before this Court on a reference made by the Board of Revenue under Section 21 (3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing portion of its judgment the Board of Revenue states: "On due consideration of the matter, I think that another opportunity should be given to Messrs. Printers (India) Ltd., to produce evidence showing the amount of despatch from the Chandisthan and Monghyr made by them and Messrs. Tobacco Manufacturers (India) Ltd., to places outside Bihar and to place their claim before the Sales Tax Officer for the purpose of a fresh hearing as to whether or not they are entitled to any deduction under Section 5(2)(a)(ii) or 5(2)(a)(v) accord- ing to the principles laid down in Case No. 64 of 1948, referred to above. The order of the present Commissioner as well as his predecessor are set aside and the case remanded for further hearing according to the direc- tions set forth above". In effect the Board of Revenue remanded the case to the Sales Tax Officer to determine whether the assessee was entitled to any deduction from the gross turnover on the principle laid down by the Board of Revenue in its resolution in the previous Case No. 64 of 1948. At the instance of the assessee the High Court ordered the Board of Revenue to state a case under Section 21(3) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
