Orissa High Court
Kamala Biri Manufacturing Co. Pvt vs State Of Odisha & Others on 13 September, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.19068 of 2023
Kamala Biri Manufacturing Co. Pvt. .... Petitioner
Ltd., West Bengal
Mr.Sidhartha Sankar Ray-2, Adv
-versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opposite parties
Mr.Sunil Kumar Mishra,Standing Counsel(for O.P.No.2)
Advocate for opposite party No.3
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
MR JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER
13.09.2023
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petitioner which is a registered company has filed
this writ petition seeking a direction from this Court to the
opposite party No.3/Odisha Forest Development
Corporation (hereinafter referred to 'O.F.D.C') to refund the
excess sales tax to the petitioner collected from the
Company i.e. differential amount of Rs.1,27,948/- &
Rs.1,20,576/- along with interest @ 16% per annum under the
central Sales Tax Act,1956 pursuant to the judgment and
order dated 28.03.2001 in OJC No. 9724 of 2000 which was
confirmed by the apex Court vide the common judgment
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: LINGARAJ BEHERA
Designation: Sr. Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: Orissa High Court,Cuttack
Date: 15-Sep-2023 11:43:05
dated 27.04.2007 by dismissing the appeals filed by the State
of Odisha.
4. The case of the petitioner is that the opposite party
No.3/O.F.D.C has collected excess sales tax from the
petitioner/Company on the purchase of Kendu leaves
against five invoices vide Bill Nos. 48/2389, 48/2390, 48/2391,
48/2392 and 48/2393. The petitioner has submitted the Form
'C' to O.F.D.C. under Annexure-4 Series with respect to five
purchase transactions through the letter dated 10.05.2002
which has been duly received by opposite party
No.3/O.F.D.C.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite
the judgment of this Court and the common judgment of the
apex Court (supra) the opposite party No.3/O.F.D.C. has
imposed CST @ 20% instead of @ 4%.
6. However, during course of hearing, learned counsel
appearing for the opposite party No.2/Commercial Tax &
GST submits that opposite party No.2 has already refunded
the excess amount to the opposite party No.3/O.F.D.C. After
receipt of it, the opposite party No.3/O.F.D.C. has also sent a
letter to the petitioner/Company vide letter No.6020 dated
22.03.2023 vide Annexure-18 requesting to submit an
Indemnity Bond and bank details along with branch and
IFSC Code for communication and release of the excess
Signature Not Verified
amount i.e. Rs.1,27,948/-and Rs.1,20,576/- to be refunded to
Digitally Signed
Signed by: LINGARAJ BEHERA
Designation: Sr. Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Date: 15-Sep-2023 11:43:05
the petitioner/Company. So, there is no dispute on the part
of opposite party No.3 to release the differential amount as
aforesaid. But so far as the interest part on the different
amount is concerned, it would be decided by the appellate
forum.
7. In such view of the matter, the petitioner/Company is
directed to approach the appropriate forum seeking
appropriate remedies available to it. In such event the
appellate forum shall consider the grievance of the petitioner
and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
8. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
9. Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.
(Dr.S.K.Panigrahi)
Judge
(G.Satapathy)
Judge
Lingaraj
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: LINGARAJ BEHERA
Designation: Sr. Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Date: 15-Sep-2023 11:43:05
