2022 (4) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d by this Court reads as under: "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the raw material purchased by the Petitioner for the purpose of adjustment of eligible exemption amount as against the certified exemption limit in terms of Entry- 43 (a) of the Finance Department Notification No.41261-CTA-106/92-F dated 23.09.1992 is to be calculated at the rate of 16% as held by the Tribunal as against the rate of 4% claimed by the Assessee?" 2. The background facts are that the Petitioner is a small scale industrial unit under the Industrial Policy Resolution (IPR) of 1992 engaged in manufacturing of low carbon, ferro manganese, roasted manganese and manganese product. In terms of IPR 1992 and in terms of Entry 43 (a) of the t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to pay sales tax on the purchase of raw materials to the extent of Rs. 6,13,404.87 at the rate of 16% and this amount was added to the taxable turnover of the Petitioner. Sales tax was also levied on the sales turnover of Rs. 52,800/- . A total tax demand by the assessment order dated 24th March 2001 was to the tune of Rs. 1,06,593/-. 6. Aggrieved by the above order, the Petitioner filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax (ACST), Cuttack-II Range, Cuttack who by an order dated 28th February 2002 confirmed the order of the AA. Thereafter, the Assessee went before the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal, Cuttack (Tribunal) with S.A. No.2289/2002-03. The order of the AA and the ACST was concurred with by the Tribunal by its ord....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... should now be permitted to produce the Form-IV to avail a concessional rate of sales tax. In other words, the Petitioner should be allowed to pay tax on the purchase of manganese to the extent of Rs. 6,13,404.87/- at 4% instead of 16%. 10. Mr. S.S. Padhy, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Department on the other hand contests the above proposition by pointing out that even the availing up the benefits on the strength of Form I-D (92) by the Petitioner was impermissible as it had already exhausted the ceiling limit to the extent of Rs. 10,79,821/. At that time, it was entitled to only to avail the balance amount of Rs. 87,107/- for the AY 1997-98. The Petitioner chose to produce I-D (92) in relation to the purchase of manganese....