Orissa High Court
C.I. Foods Limited vs State Of Orissa on 17 August, 1987
Equivalent citations: [1988]68STC284(ORISSA)
JUDGMENT H.L. Agrawal, C.J. and S.C. Mohapatra, J.
1. All these five cases, which have been heard together, are on reference by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa, under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947. The Tribunal has referred the following question for opinion of this Court in all the cases:
Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in coming to the conclusion that prawn is a category of fish and, therefore, taxable under Section 3-B of the Orissa Sales Tax Act?
The dealer is the same in all the cases. The periods, however, are five assessment years beginning from 1970-71 to 1975-76.
2. The question need not detain us in the least as the same has already been answered by a Bench decision of this Court in the case of State of Orissa v. Cifoods Limited [1982] 50 STC 152.
3. It is, however, submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that in the reported decision, the finding of the Tribunal was just to the contrary, namely, that prawn and fish are two different commodities, unlike the present cases. It is submitted that in view of the well-established principle that the theory of res judicata will not apply to a proceeding of this nature, the reported decision would have no binding effect.
4. We are, however, unable to accept the submission of the learned Standing Counsel. It is not a question of applying the principle of res judicata as such. In the reported case, the same notification and exactly the same item had fallen for consideration. Taking into consideration all the pros and cons of the matter, it was clearly laid down by this Court that "qualitatively fish and prawn are two different commodities".
5. The answer, therefore, to the question in all the cases must be given in favour of the dealer and against the Revenue. In the circumstances, we make no order as to costs.