TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1917X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be possible for this Court to decide the issue. In these circumstances, we permit the Appellants/Assessees to file fresh writ petitions with adequate material in the High Court. These petitions shall be filed within four weeks. The interim order passed in these cases shall continue for a period of four weeks. We make it clear that if the applications for stay are filed before the High Court, the High Court shall be competent to decide these applications on their own merits and would not influenced by continuation of stay granted by this Court as these stay orders were granted before answering the reference by the Nine Judge Bench and we have continued the same for four weeks only to enable the Assessees to approach the High Court in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the quantifiable benefits and should be in the form of reimbursement/recompense for the quantifiable and measurable benefits to be provided to its payers or trades people. (ii) if the tax is levied under Clause (a) of Article 304 but subject to conditions given therein that such levy or tax on goods would not result in discrimination between the goods imported from other States and similar goods manufactured or produced within the State entering into a local area. However, the scope of Clause (a) of Article 304 is limited to the extent that the State cannot impose tax on the goods imported from other States and are not manufactured or produced within that State, (iii) if the tax is imposed following the provisions of Clause (b) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... factured within the State of Orissa. Therefore, the opposite parties may make scrutiny of the same and not realize entry tax on such goods but for this the Act cannot be declared ultra vires. 3. From the aforesaid, it becomes clear that some of the issues were decided against the State, though the overall conclusion was the dismissal of the writ petitions. The State against those findings also preferred appeals. Those appeals have been allowed by us in today's date by a separate order as the said issues stand concluded in favour of the State by a Nine Judge Bench in the case of Jindal Stainless Steel v. State of Haryana reported in 2016 (11) SCALE 1. 4. In these appeals preferred by the Assessees, the Assessees have challenged th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alizing of said burden. It is submitted that since the law is now clarified, the validity of the provisions of Orissa Entry Tax are to be considered in the aforesaid prospect. We find that in some of the cases, particularly in the writ petition filed by M/s. Vedanta Aluminium Ltd. this issue was specifically raised in the High Court out of which SLP(C) No. 8199 of 2008 arises. But the High Court did not decide it. Instead the High Court in the impugned judgment has gone by the rate of Entry Tax vis-a-viz the rate of VAT/Sales Tax. Since, in order to decide the question proper pleadings are required, which are not before us, it may not be possible for this Court to decide the issue. In these circumstances, we permit the Appellants/Assessees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
