CARD BOARD PRODUCTS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Statement of the case under Section 33(2)(b) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act") has been submitted by the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, Patna, (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Tribunal") in Reference Nos. 277, 278 and 279 of 1976. The aforementioned cases arise out of the Tribunal's order dated 8th July, 1976 in Revision Cases Nos. 31, 32 and 33 of 1976 inithe matter of assessment of Messrs. Card Board Products (in short, "the assessee") for the periods 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71, respectively. Since the point involved is the same, this judgment shall govern all the three cases.

(2.) Messrs. Card Board Products was assessed to pay sales tax under the Act by three separate assessment orders dated 14th March, 1970, 23rd March, 1971 and 31st January, 1973 for the periods 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71 (annexures A, A/1 and A/2) by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hazaribagh. The assessment records of the assessee were subsequently transferred to Giridih Circle, where the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Giridih, after perusal of the assessment proceedings for the periods, referred to above, came to the conclusion that the assessee had been allowed exemption of tax on the basis of form IX, though the goods sold by it were leviable to tax at source. In the circumstances, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Giridih, issued notice to the assessee under Section 18(1) of the Act and after hearing the assessee reassessed it to pay sales tax for the periods mentioned above by three separate orders, all dated 5th March, 1975, which have been marked annexures B, B/1 and B/2 to the statement of the case. Being aggrieved by the assessment orders aforementioned the assessee moved the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Giridih, for review of the assessment orders. The applications were rejected. Thereafter it preferred appeals before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chotanagpur Division-2, Dhanbad, against the aforesaid assessment orders. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals) came to the conclusion that the appeals were without merit and, accordingly, dismissed the same by an analogous order dated 31st October, 1975 (annexure C) for all the three periods. Against that order of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (annexure C) the assessee went to the Commercial Taxes Tribunal and filed applications for revision (annexures D to D/2) under Section 31 of the Act. The Tribunal held the assessee liable to pay special sales tax on the sales of packing materials, specially card board boxes, effected by the assessee to the registered dealers and also the jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Giridih, with regard to the assessment made by him under the provisions of Section 18(1) of the Act. The Tribunal ultimately upheld the decision of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The appellate order of the Tribunal is marked annexure E to the statement of the case. Thereafter, the assessee filed applications under Section 33(1) of the Act for referring 10 questions of law to this Court out of which they were cut down by the assessee itself to five in course of hearing before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, however dismissed the applications for reference.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 2nd December, 1978 of the Tribunal (annexure G) refusing to make reference, the petitioner moved this Court for a direction to the Tribunal to state the case to it. The prayer of the assessee having been accepted by this Court the Tribunal, as already stated above, has submitted the statement of the case under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act and referred the only question of law for its opinion in these terms : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sale by the assessee of the card board boxes is subject to special sales tax under Section 5 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act read with the notification dated 12th February, 1966, issued under the proviso to Section 5 of the said Act.