Skip to content

Orissa Court January 1979 Judgments

Browse smarter

Open an 18-section brief on any judgment

Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.

  • AI Brief & Ask
  • Semantic AI Search
  • Devil's Bench

Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.

Jan 10 1979

State of Orissa Vs. Basudev Das and anr.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Jan-10-1979

Reported in: [1982]49STC143(Orissa)

1. This is an application of the State of Orissa under Section 24(2)(b) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act for a direction to the Sales Tax Tribunal to state a case and refer the following questions for opinion of the court:(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Member, Additional Sales Tax Tribunal, is legally justified in accepting the claim of the opponent under Section 5(2)(A)(a)(ii) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act when the declarations are not in conformity with the rules laid down under Rule 27(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally justified to entertain the claim for deductions and direct the assessing officer to entertain the claim for the purpose of determining the taxable turnover of the dealer ?2. The assessee is a registered dealer and one Mangulu Sahu and Co., a registered dealer carrying on business at Berhampur, functions as its commission agent. During the year 1971-72,...


Jan 03 1979

Bhaja Govinda Maikap and anr. Vs. Janaki Dei and ors.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Jan-03-1979

Reported in: AIR1980Ori108

ORDERS. Acharya, J.1. This Civil Revision is directed against the order dated 19-1-78 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Anandapur in Title Suit No. 8 of 1977 rejecting the compromise petition which had been filed in that court.2. From the order dated 4-1-78. just preceding the impugned order dated 19-1-1978, it appears that as some properties which were not the subject matter of the suit were included in the compromise petition the court observed that the said compromise petition could not be entertained unless the properties beyond the subject-matter of the suit were deleted therefrom or the plaint was suitablyamended to include these properties. On making the said observation the suit was adjourned to 19-1-78. On 19-1-1978, apart from other things, the court rejected the compromise petition as the plaintiffs by then had not amended either the compromise petition or the plaint in accordance with the court's above-mentioned previous observation dated 4-1-78. This revision has been filed...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial