Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

In view of the fact that the High Court directed the parties to pay and bear their own costs, similar order is made in all these appeals.

KHANNA, J.-This judgment would dispose of civil appeals Nos. 697 to 706 of 1973 which have been filed by special leave by Md. Serajuddin against the judgment of the Orissa High Court whereby the High Court answered the following question in respect of the two of the sales in favour of the revenue and against the assessee-appellant :

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal is right in holding that the sales effected under the following four contracts. were sales in the course of export not exigible to tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ?"
4. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case there was material available on record for assessing the petitioner under the provisions of Central Sales Tax Act ?
5. Whether the sale by the petitioner had occasioned movement of goods in course of export and is protected by article 286 of the Constitution of India ?"
The Tribunal dismissed the above application. The appellants then filed applications before the High Court that the Tribunal be called upon to file a statement of the case in respect of the above mentioned questions. The High Court dismissed those applications and in doing so relied upon the judgment in the case of Md. Serajuddin v. State of Orissa which is the subject-matter of the other 10 appeals, namely, civil appeals Nos. 697 to 706 of 1973. The above mentioned 20 appeals have been filed against the order of the High Court dismissing those applications.
Mr. Bhandare on behalf of the State has urged in these 20 appeals that the facts of these cases are materially different from those in the cases of Md. Serajuddin and as such even if we accept the appeals in the cases of Md. Serajuddin, we should not interfere with the order of the High Court in these 20 appeals. So far as the above submission is concerned, I may observe that I do not express any opinion on the point as to whether the facts of these cases are similar to those in cases of Md. Serajuddin. This is a matter which would have to be gone into after a reference and statement of case is submitted to the High Court. For our purpose it is sufficient to note that the High Court in dismissing the applications filed by the appellants placed reliance upon its decision in the cases of Md. Serajuddin. As the judgment in the cases of Md. Serajuddin is being set aside, the ground for refusing to call for a reference no longer holds good. I therefore, accept the 20 appeals filed by Nandaram Huntaram, set aside the judgment of the High Court and direct the Tribunal to file a statement of the case and refer the questions reproduced above to the High Court. The appellants shall be entitled to the costs in this Court in these appeals also. One hearing fee.