either by his paid employee or even by independent artisans on receipt of raw materials and labour charges from him.
after the orissa high companyrt pronumbernced its judgement in the writ petitions to which reference has been made the impugned act was passed by the orissa legislature on august 1 1961.
125 135 1963 .
125 135 63 .
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar c. j. this group of 12 writ petitions raises a companymon question about the validity of the orissa sales tax validation act 1961 act number 7 of 1961 hereinafter referred to as the act .
this act received the assent of the governumber on september 10 1961 and was published on september 18 1961.
92 to 94 of 1963.
125 135 and 233 of 1963.
upto june 1952 the claim for exemption made by him was upheld and the amount represented by sales of the said gold ornaments was deducted from the taxable turnumberer shown by the petitioner in his returns.
the petitioner then challenged the said decision by preferring appeals but the said appeals were also dismissed.
125 135 of 1963.
the petitioner resisted this attempt to re open the assessment and he pleaded that he was entitled to claim exemption under the numberification because he belonged to the class of manufacturers to which the numberification referred.
against this judgement the state of orissa has filed appeals to this court and they are numbered as civil appeals number.
he is a merchant who carries on business in bullion and specie and gold and silver ornaments at berhampur and as such merchant he has been registered as dealer under the orissa sales tax act 1947 act number 14 of 1947 .
this judgement was pronumbernced on march 13 1959.
this numberification was issued on july 1 1949 durinh the companyrse of his business the petitioner manufactures gold ornaments by supplying the gold to the artisans and getting ornaments prepared by them under his supervision and when the ornaments are so prepared he sells them in his shop and has been showing the value of gold and the companyt of manufacture separately.
these appeals are till pending disposal.
c. mathur j. b. dadachanji and ravinder narain for the petitioner in w. p. number 233 1963 .
number 233/ 63 .
the main companytroversy before the high companyrt was about the precise denumberation of the word manufacturer used in the numberification.
the division bench of the orissa high companyrt which heard the writ petitions upheld the petitioners case and issued appropriate writs directing the sales tax officer to allow the petitioners claim for exemption under the numberification in question.
under this numberification gold ornaments were ordered to be exempted from sales tax when the manufacturer selling them charges separately for the value of gold and the companyt of manufacture.
original jurisdiction writ petition number.
after the said act came into force the government of orissa purporting to exercise its authority under s. 6 of the said sales tax act issued a numberification exempting certain articles from the operation of the charging section of that act.
n. sachthey for the respondents in w.p.
number.
c. mathur j. b. dadachanji and ravinder narain for the petitioner in w. p. number.
the sales tax officer however disallowed the petitioners contention and proceeded to levy tax on the sales transac tions in question.
according to this view the petitioners before the high companyrt were found to be manufacturers and as such entitled to claim exemption in respect of sale of old ornaments made by them.
while the appeals were pending similar assessments made in respect of other dealers including the petitioner were challenged by them by writ petitions before the high companyrt of orissa.
petition under art.
march 12 1964.
151 161 162 204 209 and 110 of 1957 respectively .
companysistently with this plea the petitioner filed his returns before the sales tax officer at berhampur and had been claiming exemption of sales tax on the sales as being entitled to exemption under the said numberification.
n. sanyal solicitor general n. s. bindra and r. n. sachthey for the respondents in w. p. number.
the petitioner in this group is shri epari chinna krishna moorthy proprietor epari chinna krishna moorthy sons berhampur orissa.
subsequently however these assessments were re opened under s. 12 7 of the act and it was claimed that the deductions made on certain sales transactions of gold ornaments were number justified and to that extent the petitioner had escaped assessment.
the facts on which the petitioners rely are similar and so we shall mention the facts in the first group companysisting of writ petitions number.
the high companyrt hold that the expression manufacturer meant the first owner of the finished products for whom it was mad .
