2021 (3) TMI 1265

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ers for different assessment years (AYs) starting from 1999-2000 till 2004-05. 2. The said re-computation orders were passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Opposite Party No.l, purportedly under Section 12 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (OST Act) based on a judgment dated 28th October, 2016 of the Supreme Court India in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Bajaj Auto Ltd. AIR 2016 SC 5014. 3. The background to these writ petitions is that on 27th February, 2006 an order of assessment was passed by the Sales Tax officer, Sambalpur I Circle, Sambalpur computing the tax demand by holding that surcharge under the OST Act was payable before setting off the entry tax payable. A clarification of the same effect was issued by the State ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....axes. 6. Mr. B.P. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that without each of the aforementioned orders of this Court for the subsequent AYs being separately challenged and set aside by the Supreme Court, those orders, notwithstanding their inconsistency with the judgment of the Supreme Court, must be given effect to, and no re-computation of tax can be permitted in respect of those AYs. 7. This Court is unable to agree with the above submission. The very basis of the subsequent orders of this Court for the AYs in question, in favour of the assessee, was the judgment dated 5th January 2007 of this Court. In other words, there was no other basis for accepting the plea of the assessee for the AYs in question. That very ba....