M/S. Sabita Enterprises, Jeypore vs. State Of Odisha
Held
The Court noted that during the pendency of the writ petition, a communication was received on 22nd September, 2023, and transmitted to the petitioner on 16th November, 2023, by Opposite Party No.2. This communication requested the petitioner to provide details of PO numbers and invoice numbers for different periods, which is a necessary step for the issuance of Form C. In view of this development and the fact that the reliefs sought by the petitioner were effectively being addressed through this communication, the Court found no necessity to pass any further orders. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the communication made on 22nd September, 2023, which was received by the petitioner on 16th November, 2023. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Sabita Enterprises, Jeypore, approached the High Court of Orissa seeking a direction to the opposite parties to issue a statutory Form-C under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and its Rules. The petitioner also sought a direction for Opposite Party No.3 to consider the Form-C upon its issuance by Opposite Party No.4. During the pendency of the writ petition, a communication dated 22nd September, 2023, was received by the petitioner on 16th November, 2023, from Opposite Party No.2. This communication requested the petitioner to provide details of PO numbers and invoice numbers for different periods to facilitate the issuance of Form C.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for the issuance of statutory Form-C under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and its Rules? 2. Whether Opposite Party No.3 can be directed to consider the Form-C upon its issuance by Opposite Party No.4? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner sought directions for the issuance of Form-C and its subsequent consideration. The petitioner's counsel highlighted a communication received from Opposite Party No.2 requesting details to process the Form-C issuance. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Revenue or State. However, the communication from Opposite Party No.2 indicates a procedural step being taken by the authorities to address the petitioner's request.
Sections Cited
Central Sales Tax Act, 1956
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 16.11.2023 03. 1. Heard Mr. Jagabandhu Sahoo, learned Senior Advocate along Ms. Kajal Sahoo, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Sunil Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the Opposite Party- Revenue and Mr. Subash Chandra Sahoo, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.4-NALCO.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the opposite parties to issue statutory form-C under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with the Rules framed thereunder. Further prayer of the petitioner is to direct the Opposite Party No.3 to consider C Form upon issuance of the same by Opposite Party
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.