TMI Blog1994 (11) TMI 406X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the correctness of the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Ward A, Kalahandi Circle (opposite party No. 2). The dispute revolves round the question whether the word "sealed" used in serial Nos. 29 and 89 relating to tax-free and taxable goods covers both packets and containers or only packets. The Sales Tax Officer has relied on a decision of this Court in Kishore Kumar Thakkar v. State of Ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision of this Court, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that any statutory remedy will be of no use. On consideration of the entries, we are prima facie of the view that the word "sealed" related to both packets and containers. Packets and containers are different only to the extent that different articles are used for manufacturing packets and containers. In that view of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uently 89) relating to tax-free and taxable goods covers both packets and containers or only packets?" 2.. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 ("the Act"). He carries on wholesale business of purchase and sale of salt in non-sealed gunny bags and/or non-sealed nylon packets. By three different assessment orders made by the Sales Tax Officer, Kalahandi Circl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be notified. Serial No. 29 reads thus: "29. Salt Except when sold in sealed packetsand containers." Serial No. 89 reads as under: "89. Salt when sold in sealed packets and containers. 4 per cent." In Kishore Kumar Thakkar [1991] 80 STC 134 (Orissa) it has been held that the word "sealed" governs only the word "packets" and it does not govern the word "containers". Expressing dissen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lature adopted a policy of totally exempting salt from the sales tax. 6. We, therefore, record our answer to the question in the positive and in favour of the petitioner. The inevitable result of the above answer is the quashing of the impugned assessment orders, for which the empty formality of sending back the case to the Division Bench is not necessary. 7. To conclude, the petition is allow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
