1960 JTR(SC) 219
1961 12 STC 236

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J. C. Shah, K. C. Das Gupta, M. Hidayatullah, N. Rajagopala Ayyangar, S. K. Das, JJ.
THE STATE OF ORISSA AND ANOTHER
Versus
KARAMSHI WAGHJI CHAUDA
Appeal from the Judgment and Order dated the 8th August, 1955, of the Orissa High Court in O.J.C. No. 60 of 1954. Civil Appeal No. 767 of 1957
Decided On: Decided On : 20-09-1960

Sales of goods delivered outside the state for consumption in the delivery state are not taxable by the state of origin under Article 286 of the Constitution. Additionally, fees realized under the relevant sales tax rules are valid.

Act Referred :Constitution of India: Art.286(1)(a)
Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947
Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947: R.59

(A) Constitution of India - Article 286(1)(a) and Explanation - Sales Tax - Inter-state sales - Goods delivered outside the state for consumption in the delivery state are not taxable by the state of origin.

(B) Sales Tax Rules - Rule 59 - Validity of fees - Fees realized under the relevant sales tax rules are valid.

Facts of the case:
A forest contractor collecting bamboo, firewood, and timber was assessed for sales tax for eight quarters. The contractor stocked goods in godowns within the state and sold them to customers outside the state, with delivery via train. The contractor challenged the assessment on the grounds that sales occurred outside the state, were protected by constitutional provisions, and that the extension of the sales tax act to a former feudatory state was invalid.

Findings of Court:
The assessment orders for quarters prior to and ending on December 31, 1949, are valid. However, assessment orders for subsequent quarters are invalid as the goods were delivered outside the state for consumption. The order for refund of fees paid is set aside as such fees are valid.

Issues: Whether the assessment for pre-Constitution and post-Constitution periods was valid, and whether fees realized under the sales tax rules were legally sustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that for post-Constitution quarters, the assessee was not liable to be taxed because the goods were delivered outside the state for consumption in the delivery state, falling under the restrictions of Article 286 of the Constitution. For the pre-Constitution period, the court upheld the validity of the notification extending the tax act. Fees realized under the relevant rules were held to be valid.

Result: Appeal allowed in part.

Cases Referred:
The State Of Orissa And Another V. Chakobhai Ghelabhai And Co. - Referred
B. C. Patel v. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack, (1955) I.L.R. 1955 Cuttack 267; 7 S.T.C. 221 - referred to
Notification - The High Court relied on this case to hold that the notification extending the Orissa Sales Tax Act to Kalahandi was invalid.
Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack v. Messrs B. C. Patel and Co., [1959] S.C.R. 520; 9 S.T.C. 467 - relied upon
Precedent - The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision in B. C. Patel v. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack.
Chakobhai Ghelabhai, (1955) I.L.R. 1955 Cuttack 529; 7 S.T.C. 36 - referred to
Fees - The High Court followed this decision to order a refund of fees paid by the respondent.
State of Orissa v. Chakobhai Ghelabhai and Co., [1960] 11 S.T.C. 716 - relied upon
Fees - The Supreme Court held that fees realized under rule 59 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947, are valid.

Advocates Appeared:
N. C. Chatterjee, Senior Advocate, (H. J. Umrigar and T. M. Sen, Advocates, with him), for the appellants.
R. Gopalakrishnan, Advocate, and J. B. Dadachanji, Advocate of Rajinder Narain & Co., for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

S. K. DAS, J. –

This appeal on a certificate granted by the High Court of Orissa is from the judgment and order of the said High Court dated August 8, 1955. The State of Orissa and the Sales Tax Assessing Authorities are the appellants. The assessee is the respondent.

The assessee is a forest contractor in Orissa and carried on the business of collecting bamboo, firewood, timber etc., from the forest of Kalahandi in Orissa. He was assessed to sales tax for eight quarters beginning from April, 1, 1949, and ending on March 31, 1951. The Sales Tax Officer found that the assessee stocked the bamboo, timber etc. in his godowns at Lanjigorh and Rupra Road in Orissa, and then sold the goods to customers outside Orissa, the goods being despatched by train and delivered to those customers. A certificate was issued against the assessee for recovering the tax imposed.

Against the orders of assessment the assessee moved the High Court by means of a writ petition. He contended that the sales took place outside Orissa and in any case the sales of the period after the coming into force of the Constitution could not be taxed by Orissa by reason of the Explanation to Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution, as it then stood. The assessee also challenged the legality of the notification by which the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, was extended to Kalahandi, which was formerly a feudatory State.

Following its earlier decision in B. C. Patel v. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack ((1955) I.L.R. 1955 Cuttack 267; 7 S.T.C. 221), the High Court held that the notification dated March 1, 1949, by which the relevant provisions of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947, were extended to Kalahandi was invalid in law and consequently the respondent was not liable to sales tax for the pre-Constitution quarters, this is, till the quarter ending on December 31, 1949. For the subsequent quarters also the respondent could not be taxed by reason of Article 286 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition, quashed the assessment orders and directed a refund of the fees paid by the respondent to the assessing authorities on appeal and revision.

On behalf of the appellants it has been pointed out that the decision of the Orissa High Court in B. C. Patel v. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack ((1955) I.L.R. 1955 Cuttack 267; 7 S.T.C. 221) was set aside on appeal by this Court (see Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack v. Messrs B. C. Patel and Co. ([1959] S.C.R. 520; 9 S.T.C. 467)). It has not been seriously disputed that on the decision of this Court the assessee was rightly assessed to sales tax for all the quarters prior to and ending on December 31, 1949.

It is equally clear that for the post-Constitution quarters the assessee was not liable to be taxed, because admittedly the goods were delivered outside Orissa for consumption in the delivery State.

As to the fees paid, the High Court followed its earlier decision in Chakobhai Ghelabhai ((1955) I.L.R. 1955 Cuttack 529; 7 S.T.C. 36). In Appeal No. 710 of 1957 in which we have pronounced judgment to-day (Since reported as State of Orissa v. Chakobhai Ghelabhai and Co. [1960] 11 S.T.C. 716), we have held that the fees realised under rule 59 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947 , are valid and the decision of the High Court to the contrary is wrong.

The result, therefore, is that this appeal must be allowed in part. The assessment orders of the quarters prior to and ending on December 31, 1949, are valid; but the assessment orders for subsequent quarters are invalid and must be quashed. The order of the High Court for refund of fees paid by the respondent is set aside. The certificate proceedings taken against the respondent must now be restricted to the tax payable for those quarters only for which the assessment orders are valid. There will be no order for costs in this Court.

Appeal allowed in part.

Select Draft

x

My Favorites

    All Category

      Untitled

        Title

        Content

        Add Bookmark


        Selected folder : Select Folder

        Create New Folder
        Customise Print