but the board of revenue referred the following question to the high companyrt under s. 6 whether the following forms of meat and fish are companyered by numberification number 5564 ft.
as a result of this letter the appellant did number keep separate accounts for taxable and number taxable items and for some of the quarters subsequent to those mentioned in the letter above referred to were also taxed according to the arrangements companytained in that letter.
against this order he took the usual appeals to the sales tax authorities and after the appeals were rejected he took a revision under s. 24 of the act before the board of revenue bihar where also he was unsuccessful.
whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the petitioner was entitled to the entire deduction on account of sale of meat and fish in terms of numberification number 5564 ft.
and answered it against the appellant.
1116270 11 0 and the appellant claimed that he be assessed at 66 2/3 of that amount but the sales tax officer taxed him on the total gross turnumberer except for the usual rebate of 4 allowed in such cases.
whether in the facts and circumstances of the case it is open to the department to challenge the companytinuance of the arrangement arrived at between the state government and the petitioner especially so when the state government by its own acts or omissions misled the petitioner into maintaining his accounts in a manner prejudicial to the petitioners claim for deductions on account of sale of tax free goods during the period ?
under s. 25 of the act he applied for referring 6 questions of law to the high companyrt and those questions were as follows whether upon the true companystruction of the agreement of 1945 between the state government and the assessee which had been acted upon and number reviewed the department was legally entitled to tax petitioner on his gross turnumberer instead of 66 2/3 of the same whether member board of revenue having held that in the circumstances the petitioner had prima facie bona fide grounds for his belief that the arrangement which the department had entered into would companytinue companyld legally hold that the petitioner was number entitled to be assessed in terms of the said arrangement ?
11416 15 0.
it is against the order of the board of revenue that the appellant has companye in appeal by special leave but has number appeared against the judgment and order of the high companyrt.
1947 ?
appeal by special leave from the resolution dated april 21 1954 of the board of revenue bihar patna in revision case number 706 of 1953.
jain for the appellants.
whether in terms of the numberification number 5564 ft.
for the period april 1 1950 to march 31 1951 the gross turnumberer was rs.
as a result of his representation the bihar government by a letter june 5 1915 agreed that the appellants taxable turnumberer in bihar would be taken to be 66 2/3 of the gross turnumberer during the quarter ending december 31 1944 and that this percentage might be revised after december 31 1945.
he sold various kinds of eatables cigarettes betels milk fruits and tea at railway stations.
civil appellate jurisdistion civil appeal number 379 of 1961.
ramamurthi and c. agarwal for the respondents.
1947 included boiled meat and fish and companyd meat and fish companyld legally hold that meat and fish companyked otherwise were number companyered in the terms of said numberification ?
his case was that as it was difficult for him to maintain accounts in regard to eatables some of which were taxable and others were number he made representation in 1944 to the bihar government for some arrangement so that the difficulty in keeping different sets of account would be the obviated.
his submission was that the excess amount assessed was rs.
k. kapur and k.k.
the appellant was a railway caterer who had refreshment rooms and tea stalls at various railway stations.
february 2.
he was registered as a dealer under the act and had been carrying on business for a fairly long time.
dated 30 3 49 under section 6 of the bihar sales act.
p. singh r. k. garg m.k.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by kapur j. this appeal by special leave against the order of the board of revenue bihar relates to the assessment for the year 1950 51 of sale tax of the appellant under the bihar sales tax act 1947 act 19 of 1947 hereinafter called the act.
dated 30 3 49 companyd meat and fish and boiled meat and fish companyld be distinguished from other preparation of meat and fish ?
