https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155306 Demand notices under the Orissa Sales Tax Act could not be finally enforced where liability depended on Explanation II to section 2(c) as amended and validated in 1979, because the Supreme Court had already indicated that sales in the same series cannot be taxed at two points so as to fasten tax twice on successive dealers. In light of that ruling, the petitioners' liability required fresh determination by the competent Divisional Forest Officers. The impugned demand notices were therefore kept in abeyance pending re-examination. en-us Wed, 19 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:11:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155306 Demand notices under the Orissa Sales Tax Act could not be finally enforced where liability depended on Explanation II to section 2(c) as amended and validated in 1979, because the Supreme Court had already indicated that sales in the same series cannot be taxed at two points so as to fasten tax twice on successive dealers. In light of that ruling, the petitioners' liability required fresh determination by the competent Divisional Forest Officers. The impugned demand notices were therefore kept in abeyance pending re-examination. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 19 Aug 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155306