TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (11) TMI 630
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., namely, the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, South Zone, Berhampur, who upheld the order of opposite party No. 1. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed that order of opposite party No. 1 be quashed and the registration certificate be made effective from the date of service of the same on the petitioner, i.e., January 6, 1997. 3.. No counter has been filed. But we have heard learned counsel for the assessee as well as learned counsel for the Revenue. 4.. Section 9-A of the Act runs as follows: "9-A. Voluntary registration.-(1) Any dealer whose gross turnover during a period not exceeding twelve months exceeds ten thousand rupees, may, notwithstanding that he is not liable to pay tax under section 4, apply in the prescribed manner accompanied by a fee of five rupees to the prescribed authority for registration under this Act: Provided that the limit regarding the amount of gross turnover as aforesaid shall not apply in the case of a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, a society registered under the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 or a Department of Government. (2) The provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), (3-a) to (3-F) and (4) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ised or stipulated for realisation by him by way of tax in the prescribed manner: Provided that every dealer (other than a dealer required to compound the tax) who is liable to pay tax under this Act, while selling goods valued at more than ten rupees in any one transaction shall, whether or not any amount is realised or stipulated for realisation by way of tax, issue a cash, or, as the case may be, credit memo, serially numbered showing the price of the goods sold and signed by the dealer or by his servant, manager or agent and shall keep a counterfoil duly signed by him or by his servant, manager or agent and shall also maintain a true and correct account of all moneys realised or stipulated for realisation in the prescribed manner. (2-a) In cases of sale of goods where- (i) no cash or credit memo is required to be issued under sub-section (2); (ii) the goods are liable to tax on turnover of purchases; and (iii) the sale is in favour of a dealer liable to pay such tax, the purchaser shall, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, issue a cash or credit memo, as the case may be, showing the price of the goods purchased, signed by the dealer, his serva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this Act on sales and purchases with effect from the month immediately following a period not exceeding 12 months during which his gross turnover exceeded the limit specified in sub-section (7). (3) Every dealer who has become liable to pay tax under this Act shall continue to be so liable until the expiry of three consecutive years during each of which his gross turnover has filed to exceed the limit specified in sub-section (7) and such further period after the date of the said expiry as may be prescribed and his liability to pay tax under this Act shall cease on the expiry of the prescribed period: Provided that in calculating the period or three consecutive years, the part of a year during which a dealer became first or again liable shall be excluded. (4) Every dealer who has ceased to be liable to pay tax under sub-section(3) shall again be liable to pay tax under this Act with effect from the month immediately following a period not exceeding twelve months during which his gross turnover again exceeds the limit specified in sub-section (7). (5) Where a dealer liable to pay tax under this Act starts a new business, partnership, firm or concern, whether by changing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tedly by then, his turnover had not exceeded the prescribed limit. Therefore, no liability to pay tax had accrued to him. Certificate was issued to the assessee on May 12, 1972. A contention was raised relying on Bhanja Bhandar v. State of Orissa [1976] 37 STC 169 (Orissa), that once registration is granted, it should relate back to the date of the application and liability must commence from that date. The division Bench held that position under section 9-A of the Act would be different as there is no liability with reference to section 4 of the Act and before the dealer becomes statutorily liable to pay tax, with a view to deriving advantages provided under the statute he makes an application for voluntary registration and in such a case, if the liability is made to run from the date of the application, certainly the dealer would be prejudiced instead of deriving any advantage. Therefore, it was held that liability should commence from the date the certificate of the registration was received by the assessee. We are in respectful agreement with the judgment and we hold that liability to pay sales tax will commence from the date when the registration certificate was received. We m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ittedly, when the present writ petitioner filed the application under section 9-A of the Act, he was not liable to pay tax under section 4 of the Act, but became liable when the application under section 9-A was still pending with the taxing authority. 13.. Learned counsel for the Revenue also relied on another decision in State of Orissa v. Auto Syndicate [1995] 96 STC 592 (Orissa). In that case, application under section 9-A of the Act was made in January, 1981, registration certificate was issued under section 9 of the Act in August, 1981 and it was found that liability of the dealer had accrued under section 4 of the Act with effect from February, 1981. Though in that case, Bhagabati Timber's case [1982] 50 STC 134 (Orissa) has been distinguished, we find certain factual errors in the judgment inasmuch as in Bhagabati Timber's case [1982] 50 STC 134 (Orissa), application under section 9-A of the Act was made on April 22, 1972 and registration certificate was received by the dealer on May 12, 1972. We further find that in Deepak Medical Store v. State of Orissa [1988] 68 STC 293, following the decision in Bhagabati Timber [1982] 50 STC 134 (Orissa), this Court held that liabi....