Partly allowed

Indian Oil Corporati v. State and Ors.

Orissa HC19 Feb 2021WP(C)/18270/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court set aside an order rejecting a refund claim based on inter-state sales and remanded the matter for fresh consideration considering recent legal pronouncements on tax liability.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 31 March 2011 set aside and refund petition remanded to Deputy Commissioner Bhubaneswar II Circle for fresh consideration based on corrected law.

Indian Oil Corporati Vs State and Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(C) No.18270 of 2011 1

¶2

19.02.2021

¶3

Heard Mr. Sanjit Mohanty, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned counsel for Opposite Party – Sales Tax Commissioner.

¶4

In this writ petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 31^st March, 2011 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, Bhubaneswar-II-Circle, Bhubaneswar rejecting the refund application of the present Petitioner who claims that it was not liable to pay tax under Orissa Entry Tax Act on inter-state sales.

¶5

In support of this proposition, learned counsel for the Petitioner relies on the decisions in Indian Oil Corporation Limited v. Municipal Corporation, Jullandhar, AIR 1993 SC 844 , Entry Tax Officer, Bangalore v. Chandanmal Champalal & Co., (1994) 95 STC 5; this Court’s decision in M/s. Rungta Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Orissa, 1996 (I) OLR 376 , South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Bilaspur, (2009) 24 VST 348 – and the decision dated 28^th February, 2020 in S.A. No.124(ET)/2018 of the Odisha Sales Tax Tribunal, Cuttack [M/s.Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vrs. State of Odisha].

¶6

Considering the changed legal position, as reflected in the above decisions, this Court is of the view that the Deputy Commissioner, Sales Tax, Bhubaneswar-II-Circle,

¶7

¶8

Bhubaneswar, who has passed the impugned order rejecting the prayer of the Petitioner, should once again examine the refund application of the Petitioner after taking into account the legal proposition explained in all of the above decisions. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 31^st March, 2011 is hereby set aside and the refund application of the petitioner is remanded to the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Bhubaneswar II Circle, Bhubaneswar for a fresh consideration in accordance with law. A fresh order uninfluenced, by the impugned order dated 31^st March, 2011, be passed by the Deputy Commissioner, preferably after hearing the Petitioner, not later than 19^th April, 2021. The said order shall be communicated to the Petitioner not later than 26^th April, 2021.

¶9

The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶10

Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per law.

¶11

(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice

¶12

(B. P. Routray) Judge

¶13

M.K.Panda/ K. Majhi

Indian Oil Corporati v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Oil Corporati v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tapan Ku.Das Vs State and Ors.

Duryodhan Lenka Vs State

Prasanta Ku.Nanda Vs State and Ors.

Bijay Ku Panigrahi Vs State

Sasmita Bhuyan Vs State and Ors.

Susama Jena Vs State and Ors.