ORDER 20.07.2009 — Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the Revenue. This is a reference under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 referred to by the Tribunal for determination of the following questions : (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in observing that the series of sales break at every sale or purchase transaction made by an unregistered dealer and, therefore, the tax benefit of one point levy on the same goods in the same series of sales or purchases as contemplated u/s. 8 of the OST Act, 1947 is not available to the dealer-applicant and available to registered dealers only ? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, levy of tax by the learned Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ganjam Range, Berhampur on the basis of his findings is correct in law ? Let us take up question No.1 first. In this case the assessee-petitioner is a works contract who had executed civil works and had been supplied tax paid goods by the employer in course of the execution f the works contract. The assessee-peti¬tioner was an un-registered dealer at that relevant point of time. The order of assessment pertains to the year 1984-85 and 1985-86 and the goods which had suffered first point tax and supplied by the employer had been excluded from the petitioner’s taxable turnover. Accordingly the Assessing Officer had allowed a deduc¬tion of Rs.5,76,542.10 for the year 1984-85 from the GTO being the materials supplied by the department, which had suffered tax for the year 1984-85 and for the year 1985-86 deduction of Rs.5,93,459.11 being the cost of the materials supplied by the department which had suffered tax was allowed while framing the assessment. The dealer-applicant approached the ACST against the aforesaid order of assessment on some other issues and first appellate authority disallowed the deduction which had earlier been allowed by the Assistant Officer. The same was challenged by the assessee in the second appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal who upheld the order of the first appellate authority and on an application of the assessee the matter was referred to the High Court on the issues as indicated above. The fact that the declared goods were supplied by the employer for execution of the work is admitted. The fact that the declared goods were supplied by the employer for execution of the work is admitted. So only on the basis that the assessee is an ‘unregistered dealer’, the claim of the assessee was disallowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to the decision of Kailash Nath Mohanty v. State of Orissa reported in (2002) 126 STC 79 (Orissa) in which this Court answered a similar question raised in para-7, which reads as follows : “The scheme of the Act is to levy single point tax at the first point or last point of sales or purchases by successive dealers as notified by the State Government from time to time. It is not in dispute that the Indian-made foreign liquor and beer are subject to levy of tax at the last point of sale. Proviso to Section 8 lays down that the same goods shall not be taxed at more than one point in the same series of sales or purchases by successive dealers. In view of the fact that the sale of Indian-made foreign liquor and beer had already suffered tax, the peti¬tioner cannot be further fastened with the liability to pay tax as it would amount to double taxation prohibited under Section 8 of the Act.” Hence, in view of the aforesaid judgment, the question so referred by the Tribunal no more res intigra and the reference is answered in terms of the judgment of Kailash Nath Mohanty (Supra) and in favour of the assessee. So far as question No.2 is concerned, in view of our finding to question No.1, we affirm the order of the Assessing Officer and quash the orders of the first appellate authority, as well as the Sales Tax Tribunal. Consequential necessary action shall be taken for refund of the amount of tax already paid to the asses¬see, if any. The STREV is disposed accordingly. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. STREV disposed of.