BIPRA CHARAN PATRA v. ORISSA FOREST CORPORATION LTD.
1991-09-20
ARIJIT PASAYAT, D.P.MOHAPATRA
body1991
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT : 1. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act filed this writ application seeking a direction to the opp. parties 1 and 2, the Orissa Forest Corporation Ltd. and its Divisional Manager at Potteru (I) Division to refund his security deposit. Admittedly the refund of the amount has been withheld by the corporation solely on the ground that the Corporation may be held liable for sales tax for the violation of the conditions of the ('D' forms submitted by the petitioner to the Corporation at the time of sale. The petitioner had submitted the 'D' forms in question at the time of purchase of timber by him from the Corporation and therefore did not pay sales tax on the transaction. It is Corporation's case that goods had not been sold in the State of Orissa but had been utilised for inter-State sale as observed in the Corporation's assessment by Sales Tax authorities. 2. The question for consideration is whether in the aforesaid circumstances any liability for tax accrues on the Corporation. In this respect Section 5 (2)(A)(a) (ii) second proviso is clear. It reads as follows - "Provided further that where any goods specified in the certificate or registration are purchased by a registered dealer free of tax after furnishing a declaration (under the preceding provision) but are utilised by him for any other purpose, the price of the goods so purchased shall be allowed to be deducted from the gross turnover of the selling dealer but shall be included in the taxable turnover of the purchasing dealer." 3. On a bare perusal of this provision, it is manifest that in the situation noted earlier the liability for the tax if any is that of the purchasing dealer; in the present case is the petitioner. No liability for the tax on this ground can be fixed on the Corporation. There is therefore, no justifiable reason for withholding the petitioner's security deposit. 4. In the result the writ application is allowed and the opp. parties 1 and 2 are directed to refund the security deposit of the petitioner within 3 months. Final Result : Allowed