HARDUTT MULL JUTE MILLS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Misc. Judicial Case No. 414 of 1953, the assessee has a jute mill at Katihar in the district of Purnea where he carries on business in jute and jute products and cotton cloth. The assessee has also got a jute purchasing centre at Forbesganj in the same district where he carries on business of purchasing and selling Jute as well as textile. For the period 1-4-1948 to 31-3-1949, the assessee did not produce any return showing the gross turnover. A notice under Section 13, Sub-section (4), Bihar Sales Tax Act was served upon the assessee, calling upon him to produce his accounts for the period in question. More than a dozen adjournments were granted but the assessee failed to produce the account books. Thereupon the Sales Tax Officer proceeded to make an assessment under Section 13(4) of the statute to the best of his judgment. The order of the Sales Tax Officer is dated 22-1-1950. The Sales Tax Officer determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 1,02,31,200/- and the sales tax was computed at Rs. 1,91,835/-, The assessee took the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Sales Tax, but the appeal was dismissed. The assessee then moved the Board of Revenue and filed an application in revision, but this application was also dismissed by the Board of Revenue. At the instance of the assessee the Board of Revenue has stated the following question of law for the opinion of the High Court under Section 25(1), Bihar Sales Tax Act:

(2.) In Misc. Judicial Case No. 415 of 1953 the material facts are of similar character. The assessment is for the period 1-7-1947 to 31-3-1948, and the date of the assessment order of the Sales Tax Officer is 23-11-1949. The Sales Tax Officer determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 74,97,000 and the sales tax payable at Rs. 1,17,140/10/-. In this case also the assessee took the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Bhagalpur Division, but the appeal was dismissed. The assessee preferred an application to the Board of Revenue in revision, but that application also was dismissed by the Board of Revenue. At the instance of the assessee the Board of Revenue has stated a case for the opinion of the High Court on the following question of law:

(3.) After having heard counsel for the parties we consider that the questions referred to by the Board of Revenue in these cases have not been properly framed. In our opinion the questions should be framed in the following manner so as to bring out the real controversy between the parties: