A three Judge Bench of the High Court by its judgment dated May 11, 1976 answered the questions as under 1 on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was companyrect in holding that there was numbercontravention of the declarations given under Rule 27 2 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules and, therefore, the proviso to section 5 2 A a ii of the Orissa Sales Tax Act was number attracted.
The assessee purchased certain goods from a registered dealer on the basis of declaration furnished by it for resale of the purchased goods in the State of Orissa.
The respondent assessee is a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act 1947, the Act .
These appeals by the State of Orissa are against the Judgment of the High Court.
In the fact and circumstances of the case, the sales by the assessee to the Japanese buyer are companyered by the embargo under Article 286 l b of the Constitution of India read with section 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act and, therefore, are number exigible to sales tax under the Orissa Act.
The Tribunal by its order dated March 2, 1973 annulled the assessment and directed the refund of tax and penalty, if paid.
The remaining question, in view of what we have already stated, does number survive for answer.
The Sale Tax Officer added the amount of the relevant sales to the taxable turnover of the respondent and issued a demand for payment of the tax.
The Tribunal came to the companyclusion that the sale by the respondent in favour of the Japanese buyers, was within the State of Orissa and, as such there was numberviolation of the terms of the declarations.
The Sales Tax Officer came to the companyclusion that the mineral ores were sold in violation of the declarations furnished by the respondent and, as such, companytravened the provisions of Section 5 2 A a ii of the Act.
Arising out of SLP C No.
While purchasing mineral ores from the mine owners the respondent gave declarations in terms of Rule 27 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947 the Rules to the effect that the said mineral Ores would be resold within the State of Orissa.
1 SCR 762 The Judgment and Order of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH, J. The Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa referred the following question under Section 24 1 of the Orissa Sales tax Act 1947 the Act for the opinion of the High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is companyrect in holding that there has been numbercontravention of the declaration given under Rules 27 2 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules thus attracting the proviso to section 5 2 A a ii of the Orissa Sales Tax Act?
Against the assessment made, the respondent preferred appeals under the Act before the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax which were dismissed.
The assessee thereafter preferred appeals before the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa.
The Sales Tax Officer while examining the accounts relating to the relevant period found that the respondent has sold the mineral ores in the companyrse of export to the Japanese buyers with whom the assessee had pre existing export companytracts.
The respondent assessee is registered as a dealer under the Act.
The respondent filed an appeal before the first appellate authority, which was dismissed.
So far as the writ petitions falling under category No.
v. The Sales Tax Officer .
With Civil Appeal No.
343 347 of 1987 titled M s. Industrial Minerals Metals and Anr.
1 and 2 above and the assessment and imposition of tax in respect of those petitioners was quashed.
As the accounts had to be re verified to ascertain the companyrect, figures, the Tribunal remanded the matter.
Civil Appeals Nos.
It was companytended before the Tribunal that the goods were resold in Orissa and the transaction with the Japanese buyers being sale in the companyrse of export, it was number liable to tax by virtue of Article 286 1 b of the Constitution of India.
Civil Appeal No.
4840 of 1994.
The Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Limited, respondent in the appeals herein, is a government companypany within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956.
Aggrieved by the order of the first appellate authority, the respondent filed a second appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal.
3 above are companycerned, those were dismissed with numberorder as to companyts.
The goods were however sold in the companyrse of inter State trade.
868 of 1987.
4969 of 1979 .
4970 of 1979 .
1994 SUPPL.
343 347 of 1987.
The order of the Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack III Circle pertaining to the assess ment year 1982 83 was also sought to be quashed in the writ petition.
4889 of 1979 .
4842 of 1994.
4841 of 1994.
These appeals are sequel to the applications filed by the State of Orissa under Section 24 2 b of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 the Act for a direction to the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal to state a case and refer the questions framed out of the appellate order of the Tribunal for the opinion of the High Court.
The Sales Tax Officer came to the companyclusion that the declaration furnished by the assessee was violated and, as such, it became liable under the proviso to Section 5 2 A a ii of the Act.
The High Court allowed the writ petitions falling under category Nos.
The challenge to the validity of Section 5 2 A a ii of the OST Act was on the following grounds that it is beyond the legislative companypetence of the State legislature to enact the provision since the tax relates to inter State sale export sale in respect of which the Parliament has the exclusive companypetence to legislate.
During the years 1966 67, 1967 68 and the quarters ending June, September and December 1968, the respondent purchased mineral ores from the mine owners, who were registered dealers under the Act.
These appeals by the State of Orissa are against, the full Bench judgment of the High Court.
Order The appellants challenged the validity of Section 5 2 A a ii of the Orissa Sales Tax, 1947 the OST Act as amended by Section 2 c of the Orissa Sales Tax Amendment Act, 1978 by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Orissa High Court.
XXXIV, that is, after 26.4.1978.
With Civil Appeal No.
And Civil Appeal No.
KULDIP SINGH, J. Leave granted in all the special leave petitions.
Arising out of SLP C No.
Arising out of SLP C No.
Civil Appeal No.
for the reasons recorded and the companyclusions reached in the above judgments, we dismiss the Special Leave Petition.
654 of 1991.
