1960 (4) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e two quarters ending 31st December, 1953, and 31st March, 1954. Thereafter, the Sales Tax Officer issued a notice under section 12(4) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, but the petitioner neither filed a return nor produced any accounts relating to his turnover. Then the Sales Tax Officer proceeded to assess him to the best of his judgment. He called for the records of the Puri Civil Supplies Office and found that the petitioner had received certain payments from Government for supply of paddy and also for supply of gunny bags. From these figures he estimated his gross turnover and, after deducting the money paid for the supply of paddy which was an exempted article, he assessed the petitioner to sales tax for sale of the gunny bags to Governmen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s treated as a separate and distinct transaction from that relating to the supply of paddy. Hence, it was urged that the necessary finding on facts for the purpose of applying the aforesaid decision was wanting in this case and that the petitioner was not entitled to any relief.   4.. In my opinion this contention of Mr. Misra appearing for the Department is well founded. The powers of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution are very limited. It cannot enter into disputed questions of fact and come to an independent finding of its own: see Satyanarayan v. MallikarjunaA.I.R. 1956 S.C. 137. Doubtless if, on the facts admitted by both parties or conceded by the Sales Tax Department, it is clear that no sales tax is pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....his own default left no other option to the Sales Tax Officer except to assess him to the best of his judgment on the basis of figures supplied by the Puri District Civil Supplies Office. I must therefore hold that the necessary finding on facts for the purpose of applying the principle laid down in the aforesaid decision are totally wanting in this case and the petitioner is solely responsible for this omission. 6.. Mr. Das, on behalf of the petitioner, then urged that the matter may be remanded to the Sales Tax Officer for rehearing so that the petitioner may get an opportunity to prove the necessary facts to bring the case within the scope of the aforesaid decision. We are not satisfied, at this belated stage, that this prayer should ....