TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (3) TMI 361
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... petitioner is an assessee under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and is a registered dealer. For the assessment year 1986-87, assessment under section 12 of the Act was made by the assessing officer, namely, the Sales Tax Officer, Barbil. The said assessing officer by his order of assessment dated 10th June, 1987 came to hold that excess amount of Rs. 2,194 paid by the dealer is refundable to him as per law. The order of assessment has been annexed as annexure-1. The petitioner then filed an application for refund under section 14 of the Act which has been annexed as annexure-2. The Sales Tax Officer issued a notice to the petitioner under section 12(5) and 12(8) of the Act on a finding that he has reas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. Second proviso to section 14 of the Act is extracted hereunder in extenso: "Provided further that no claim to refund of any tax, penalty or interest paid under this Act shall be allowed in cases where there is an order for reassessment, until the reassessment is finalised." It is to be noted that the aforesaid second proviso was not there in the original statute and was inserted by the amendment under Orissa Act 23 of 1983 which was given effect to from 12th August, 1983. In fact, the necessity for the aforesaid amendment arose on account of two Bench decisions of this Court in the case of Orient Paper and Industries Ltd. v. Sales Tax Officer, Sambalpur III Circle, Jharsuguda [1982] 50 STC 211 decided on 27th August, 1981 which was fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d counsel that could not have been the intention of the second proviso to section 14 and even though the plain meaning of the second proviso may confer that meaning, the court should, at the cost of doing violence of the language, interpret the same in a manner which would subserve ends of justice. 5. Mr. A.B. Misra, learned Standing Counsel for the department, on the other hand contends that in view of the unambiguous and plain language used in the second proviso to section 14 of the Act, the moment an order of reassessment is passed, application for refund cannot be allowed until finalisation of the reassessment proceeding. According to the learned Standing Counsel, an order for reassessment starts with initiation of a notice un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatute are ordinarily to be understood in the natural, ordinary, popular and grammatical meaning unless such a construction leads to an absurdity or the context or the object of the statute suggests a different meaning. In construing the provision of a statue it is essential for a court, in the first instance, to give effect to the natural meaning of the words used therein, if those words are clear enough. It is only in the case of any ambiguity that a court is entitled to ascertain the intention of the legislature by construing the provisions of the statute as a whole and taking into consideration other matters and the circumstances which led to the enactment of the statute. This being the rule of interpretation, it is not possible for us ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... would always possess whenever an order of refund becomes the subject-matter of an appeal or any other proceeding under the Act. This is an enabling power of the Commissioner to withhold refund till such time as he deems proper. But, second proviso to section 14 puts a statutory bar to allow any claim of refund in a case where there is an order for reassessment until the reassessment is finalised. There is no conflict between the second proviso to section 14 and section 14-D and both can harmoniously operate in their respective fields. Accordingly, we do not find any substance in Mr. Ray's contention. 8.. The only other contention which survives for our consideration is whether a notice under section 12(8) of the Act can be construed to ....