TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the petitioner could invoke writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India despite not pursuing the statutory remedy provided by the Bihar Sales Tax Act; (ii) Whether the excise duty paid by purchasers on behalf of the petitioner formed part of the sale price and taxable turnover under the Bihar Sales Tax Act.
Issue (i): Whether the petitioner could invoke writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India despite not pursuing the statutory remedy provided by the Bihar Sales Tax Act.
Analysis: The Bihar Sales Tax Act created a complete machinery for assessment, appeal, revision, reference to the High Court, and relief against refusal to state a case. The existence of that statutory scheme meant that complaints relating to assessment were ordinarily to be pursued through the remedies expressly provided by the Act. Writ jurisdiction was an extraordinary remedy and was not meant to bypass the statutory procedure, especially where the petitioner had not shown any sufficient justification for omitting to use the remedy available under the Act.
Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to bypass the statutory remedy and seek relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Issue (ii): Whether the excise duty paid by purchasers on behalf of the petitioner formed part of the sale price and taxable turnover under the Bihar Sales Tax Act.
Analysis: Under the sales tax law, sale price included the valuable consideration for the sale, and turnover included the aggregate of sale prices received and receivable. The excise rules placed the liability for duty on the petitioner, and the purchasers paid the duty into the treasury on the petitioner's behalf as part of the transaction. The Court treated the duty payment as part of the consideration for the goods and as constructive receipt by the petitioner. The substance of the transaction, not the form of the receipts, governed the taxability of the amount.
Conclusion: The excise duty amount was part of the sale price and was rightly included in the petitioner's taxable turnover.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the assessment failed both on the availability of the writ remedy and on the merits of the turnover computation, so the petitioner obtained no relief.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a sales tax statute provides a complete appellate and revisional machinery, writ jurisdiction will not ordinarily be used to circumvent it, and amounts paid by purchasers towards a duty for which the dealer is legally liable may form part of the sale price and taxable turnover when they represent consideration for the sale.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
