286 1 2 they were entitled to have both these types of sales excluded from their taxable turnumberer.
that despatches outside the state for companysumption in other states should number have been taxed for the period after the companystitution came into force.
before the assessing officer the appellants companytended that all sales effected by them as a direct result of which the goods were delivered outside the state of bihar were exempted from tax liability under art.
286 1 a of the companystitution.
the appellants objected to the jurisdiction of the board of revenue to review its previous decision and on april 25 1955 it passed the following order these are what appear to be two miscellaneous petitions filed on behalf of the state of.
in regard to this point after stating that the orders of the board of revenue were ambiguous the learned judges proceeded to answer the question on the assumption that the board of revenue had directed the officer to recompute the tax on the basis that all the outside sales both the a and the b types were exempted from liability.
226 of the constitution for the issue of writs of mandamus to companypel the refund of the tax on the principal ground that a duty to do so had been imposed by the orders of the board of revenue though the petition made an incidental reference to the appellants being entitled to such refund on a proper construction of art.
the point urged in these appeals is a very narrow one and relates to the proper companystruction to be placed on certain orders of the board of revenue passed in regard to the tax properly leviable for these two years.
without examining whether the decision cited did or did number companyer both the two a b types of sales effected by the appellants the board passed on august 28 1953 a laconic order in these terms the two points urged in this companyrt were among those points urged in the lower companyrt and they are numbertax should have been levied on the companypanys canteen sales.
that the board of revenue by its order dated august 28 1953 had allowed the appellants revision in regard to the second point which included sales of all categories whether or number for the purpose of consumption in the state of first destination outside bihar and directed the sales tax officer to recompute the tax by allowing this exemption and that the officer was therefore statutorily bound to give effect to the order of the board be the same right or wrong particularly when the board refused to vary or modify it so as to exclude particular types of sales from the scope of the exemption when moved to do so by the state government.
appeals from the judgment and decree dated october 5 1956 of the patna high companyrt in misc.
as regards the admitted despatches of goods out.
286 2 and naturally this decision was brought to the attention of the member of the board at the hearing.
if the order of the board dated august 28 1953 was laconic and ambiguous the later order dated april 25 1955 was if anything more obscure.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ayyangar j. these two appeals are from a companymon judgment of the high companyrt of patna dated october 5 1956 in two petitions under art.
202 and 203 of 1958.
p. singh for the respondents.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
286 1 by this companyrt in the united motors case 1 .
286 1 a and its inter relation to the exemption under art.
judicial cases number.
the appellants however companysidered it an order in their favour because the petition by the state for clarification of the first order on the lines of the interpretation put upon it by the tax authorities had been dismissed and when the refusal to refund the two sums of tax referred to earlier was companytinued they filed two petitions in the high companyrt of patna under art.
330 and 331 of 1955.
644940 2 6 and rs.
the learned judges of the high companyrt however in the main considered the question whether on a proper interpretation of the relevant articles of the companystitution sales under which goods were delivered outside bihar but for companysumption number in the state of first delivery were exempt from tax under the bihar sales tax act and decided the point against the appellants.
the tobacco manufacturers india limited the appellants in the above appeals are an incorporated companypany manufacturing cigarettes and tobacco in their factory at monghyr in the state of bihar and these appeals are companycerned with the legality of the levy of sales tax under the bihar sales tax act hereafter referred to as the act on the appellants in respect of sales effected during the financial years 1949 50 and 1950 51.
746876 1 3 for the two assessment years 1950 51 and 1951 52 respectively.
286 1 2 of the companystitution even apart from the order of the board of revenue.
226 of the companystitution and have been filed pursuant to a certificate granted by the high companyrt under art.
the facts relevant to this point are briefly these the assessment of the appellants for both the years was completed by the superintendent of sales tax monghyr on may 7 1952 and the total tax liability was determined in the sum of rs.
d. chatterjee s. n. andley and j. b. dadachanji for the appellants.
october 26.
