TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1973 (5) TMI 83
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t been paid by the dealer but by his vendor who was the first purchaser? (2) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing the exemption claimed and reducing the assessment to returned figure and thereby accepting the return of the dealer?" 2.. The assessee is a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act) bearing No. GAC-I-5-45 and deals in mahua seeds as one of the items of trade. Mahua seeds are declared goods under the Central Act. During 1967-68 the assessee sold mahua seeds in the course of inter-State trade. On scrutiny of the assessee's accounts it transpired that he had claimed exemption on a turnover of sale to the tune of Rs. 23,686 o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red goods. It makes no difference between the dealer who had paid the purchase tax himself on the declared goods and another who had not paid the purchase tax and is thus a subsequent purchaser from the one who had initially paid the purchase tax. I do not agree that there is any emphasis put by this notification on the dealer which is obviously attached to the goods that are declared." In the reference application made by the State of Orissa it was contended before the Tribunal that section 15 of the Central Act imposed restrictions and conditions in regard to levy of tax on sales or purchases of the declared goods within the State. Sub-section (a) thereof provides that tax payable inside the State shall not exceed the prescribed rate and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ods and such goods are sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, the tax so levied shall be refunded to such person in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be provided in any law in force in that State." 4.. In exercise of the power vested in the State of Orissa under sub-section (5) of section 8 of the Act, the following notification had been made on 8th December, 1966: "No. 43637-C.T.A.-200/66-F.-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (5) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956), the State Government having been satisfied that it is necessary to do so in the public interest hereby direct that in respect of all declared goods sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed and collected in respect of such declared goods and refund of such tax shall not be claimed or has not been made. Before the Tribunal the assessee had contended that under the scheme of the Orissa Act purchase tax is paid at the first point and subsequent purchases are no more exigible to purchase or sales tax. In respect of declared goods the Central Act also prohibits levy of tax at more than one point. The assessee had, therefore, contended that the first condition under the notification had been satisfied. Identity of the goods and not the identity of the person in whose hands the intraState sale or purchase had been taxed was material according to the assessee. The revenue had, however, contended that unless the goods which ultimate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax has been maintained by the statute and if it has been paid on the intraState sale or purchase, a second set of tax under the Central Act is not payable. But if the Central tax has been levied it is made refundable on proof of the fact that on the same goods at an earlier point tax under the State Act had been paid. 7.. The only question of difference between the learned counsel for the parties is as to whether the person paying the intra-State tax must be the assessee under the Central Act. We do not find support for the stand of the revenue because the two statutes, so far as this aspect of the matter is concerned, are complimentary to each other and one pattern has been followed in both the statutes. Ordinarily, under the Orissa Act....