{"id":105765,"date":"1997-09-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1997-09-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997"},"modified":"2018-06-02T05:46:36","modified_gmt":"2018-06-02T00:16:36","slug":"commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & … vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & … vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997<\/div>\n
Author: V Khare<\/div>\n
Bench: S.P. Bharucha, V.N. Khare<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nCOMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX ORISSA & ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nM\/S. HALARI STORE ETC.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t26\/09\/1997\n\nBENCH:\nS.P. BHARUCHA, V.N. KHARE\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
\t      THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1997
\nPresent:\n<\/p>\n
\t       Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.P. Bharucha
\n\t       Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.N. Khare
\nA.B.Diwan, Sr.\tadv., and  P.N. Misra, Adv. with him for the
\nappellants
\n     Raju Ramachandran,\t Sr.Adv., Sanjeev  Das, Rajesh, P.K.
\nMullick\t and   Gaurab  Banerjee,  Advs.\t with  him  for\t the
\nRespondents
\n\t\t      J U D G M E N T
\nThe following Judgment of the Court was delivered:\n<\/p>\n
\t\t      J U D G M E N T
\nV.N. KHARE, J.\n<\/p>\n
     Leave granted in all the matters.\n<\/p>\n
     These appeals  by special\tleave,\traise  the  question
\n“whether the  Commissioner of Sales Tax, suo motu can revise
\nunder clause  (a) of  Sub-section (4)  of Section  23 of the
\nOrissa Sales  Tax Act (in short “the Act”) read with rule 80
\nof the\tOrissa Sales  Tax Rules\t (in short  “the Rules”), an
\nappellate order\t passed by  the\t Assistant  Commissioner  of
\nSales Tax.”\n<\/p>\n
     The respondent  herein is a registered dealer under the
\nAct and running a wholesale business in purchase and sale of
\nbeetle nuts  at malgodown,  Cuttack.   In pursuance  to\t the
\nnotices\t issued\t  under\t Section   12(4)  of  the  Act,\t the
\nrespondent appeared  before the\t concerned Sales Tax Officer
\nand  produced\tthe  books  of\taccounts  for  the  relevant
\nassessment years  for verification.   The  Sales Tax officer
\nrejected the  books of\taccounts produced by the respondent-
\ndealer and  completed the  assessments to  the best  of\t his
\njudgment. Feeling  aggrieved by\t the same,  the\t respondent-
\ndealer\tpreferred   appeals  before   the  first   appellate
\nauthority, namely,  the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax,
\nCuttack, under\tSection 23(1)  of the  Act.   The  appellate
\nauthority by  its orders allowed the appeals in part for the
\nassessment year\t 1992-93 and in full for the assessment year
\n1993-94.   Thereafter, the  Additional Commissioner of Sales
\nTax, exercising\t his suo  motu\trevisional  power  conferred
\nunder Section  23(4)(a) of  the Act read with rule 80 of the
\nRules, issued  notices dated  9.6.1995\tto  the\t respondent-
\ndealer to  show cause  as to why should the appellate orders
\npassed by  the Assistant  Commissioner of  Sales Tax  be not
\nrevised, the  same being  erroneous and\t prejudicial to\t the
\ninterest  of  the  Revenue.    It  is  at  this\t stage,\t the
\nrespondent-dealer challenged  the said\tnotices by  means of
\nwrit petitions under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution
\nof India before the High Court of Office.  The contention of
\nthe respondent\tdealer before  the High\t Court was  that the
\nCommissioner of\t Sales Tax  has no jurisdiction to issue the
\nimpugned notices.   The\t High Court  quashed  the  eimpugned
\nnotices and allowed the Original Jurisdiction Cases No. 4496
\nand  4497  of  1995.  want  of\tjurisdiction  in  Additional
\nCommissioner of Sales Tax in issuing the impugned notices to
\nthe respondent\tdealer was  found by  the High\tCourt on two
\ngrounds.    Firstly,  the  appellate  order  passed  by\t the
\nAssistant Commissioner\tof Sales Tax was not an order within
\nthe meaning  of\t expression  “order  made  under  this\tAct”
\noccurring in  clause (a)  of sub-section  (4) of Section (4)\n<\/p>\n
(a) of\tSection 23  places a  limitation on  the exercise of
\nrevisional power  by the  Commissioner when  it concerns  an
\nappellate order.\n<\/p>\n
     Before we\tadvert to  the reasonings  given by the High
\nCourt in  allowing the\twrit petition,\tit is appropriate to
\nnotice the  decision of\t this Court  in the case of State of
\nOrissa and  others vs.\tKrishna Stores,<\/a>\t [1997(3) SCC  246],
\nwherein this  court was\t called upon to interpret clause (a)
\nof the\tsubject matter\tfor  consideration  before  us,\t and
\nunamended rule\t80 of  the Rules.   In\tthat case  a  dealer
\nsuccessfully challenged\t the  notice  issued  to  him  under
\nSection 23(4)(a)  of the  Act read with unamended rule 80 of
\nthe Rules before the High Court of Orrisa on the ground that
\nissue of  notice to  revise an\tappellate order\t is  without
\njurisdiction. This Court while interpreting Section 23(4)(a)
\nof the\tAct was\t of the view that, in the context of Section
\n23(4) where  the words\t“other than  an appellate order” are
\nabsent,\t there\t is  no\t limitation  on\t the  power  of\t the
\nCommissioner exercising\t suo motu  power  as  to  revise  an
\nappellate order.  This Court held thus:-\n<\/p>\n
     “under    Section\t   23(4)     the
\n     Commissioner can,\tinter  alia,  on
\n     his own  motion  revise  any  order
\n     made under this act or the Rules by
\n     any person other than a tribunal or
\n     an additional tribunal.  Therefore,
\n     under    this    sub-section    the
\n     Commissioner   is\t not   expressly
\n     prevented\tfrom   revising\t is  not
\n     expressly prevented  from\trevising
\n     an appellate  order if  made by any
\n     person other  than the  tribunal or
\n     an additional tribunal”.\n<\/p>\n
     In that  case, the\t unamended rule\t 80  also  fell\t for
\nconsideration.\t The unamended\trule 80 as it stood then, is
\nextracted below:-\n<\/p>\n
     “80. The  Commissioner may\t of  his
\n     own  motion,  at  any  time  within
\n     three  years   from  the\tdate  of
\n     passing  of   any\torder\tby   the
\n     Assistant Sales  Tax Officer  or by
\n     the Sales\tTax Officer  and  within
\n     two years\tfrom the date of passing
\n     of\t any   order   other   than   an
\n     appellate order  by the  Additional
\n     Commissioner,  Deputy  Commissioner
\n     or the  Assistant Commissioner,  as
\n     the  case\tmay  be,  call\tfor  the
\n     record of\tthe proceedings in which
\n     such order\t was passed  and  revise
\n     any such order.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t  (emphasis supplied)
\n     Interpreting the unamended rule 80, this Court observed
\nthat the Commissioner is empowered to revise any order other
\nthan  an   appellate  order   passed   by   the\t  Additional
\nCommissioner,\tDeputy\t Commissioner\tor   the   Assistant
\nCommissioner.  The said view of this Court was on account of
\nthe language  used in  the unamended rule to which expressly
\nprohibited the\trevision of  an appellate  order.   however,
\nthis Court upheld the exercise of suo motu power of revision
\nby the\tCommissioner on\t the ground that the appeal filed by
\nthe dealer  was rejected  at the  threshold due\t to  certain
\ndefects in the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
     Subsequently, rule\t 80 which  was the subject matter of
\ninterpretation in  the case  of State  of Orissa  v. Krishna
\nStores<\/a> (supra)\twas amended,  and the  amended\trule  80  is
\nreproduced below:-\n<\/p>\n
     “80, Revision  by the  Commissioner
\n     suo motu.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The Commissioner  may  on\this  own
\n     motion at\tany  time  within  three
\n     years from\t the date  of passing of
\n     any order\tby the Sales Tax Officer
\n     or within\ttwo years  from the date
\n     Officer or\t within two  years  from
\n     the date of passing of any order by
\n     the    Additional\t   Commissioner,
\n     Special Additional\t Commissioner or
\n     Assistant Commissioner, as the case
\n     may be,  call for\trecords\t of  the
\n     proceedings in which such order was
\n     passed and if he considers that any
\n     order passed  therein is  erroneous
\n     in so  far as  revenue he may after
\n     giving the dealer an opportunity of
\n     being heard  and  after  making  or
\n     causing to\t be made such enquiry as
\n     he deems  necessary revise any such
\n     order :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Provided  that   the   Commissioner
\n     shall not\trevise any  order  under
\n     this rule-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (1) where\tan  appeal  against  the
\n     order   is\t  pending   before   the
\n     appellate authority under S. 23, or
\n     (2) where time-limit for filling an
\n     appeal  under   S.\t  23   has   not
\n     expired.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     In view  of deletion  of words “other than an appellate
\norder” in the amended rule, there is no manner of doubt that
\nunder Section  23(4)(a), read  with  amended  rule  80,\t the
\nCommissioner has  suo motu  power  to  revise  an  appellate
\norder. The  decision in\t the case  of State  of\t Orrisa\t vs.
\nKrishna\t Stores<\/a>\t  (supra)  read\t  with\tamended\t  rule\t 80,
\nsubstantially  resolves\t  the  controversy  as\tregards\t the
\nCommissioner exercising\t suo motu  power of  revision as  to
\nrevise under  Section 23(4) (a) of the Act read with rule 80
\nof the Rules, an appellate order.\n<\/p>\n
     Adverting to  the first  reasoning given  by  the\tHigh
\nCourt that  the appellate  order does  not fall\t within\t the
\nmeaning\t of  the  expression  “order  made  under  the\tAct”
\noccurring in  clause (a) of sub-section (4) of Section 23 of
\nthe Act,  it is\t necessary to  set out the provisions of the
\nAct which are extracted below:\n<\/p>\n
     “23. Appeals and revision.
\n     (2) Within thirty days from he date
\n     of receipt of the copy of-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (a) an  order of assessment with or
\n     without penalty  under S.\t12, 12-A
\n     or 12-B; or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (b) an  order directing  payment of
\n     interest under  sub.S. (4-a)  of S.
\n     12; or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (c) an order imposing penalty under
\n     sub-S.(3) of  S.9-B or under sub-S.
\n     (3) of S. 11,
\n     any dealer\t or person,  as the case
\n     may  be,  may,  in\t the  prescribed
\n     manner  appeal  to\t the  prescribed
\n     authority against such order:
\n     Provided that  no appeal  shall  be
\n     entertained by  the said  authority
\n     unless he\tis satisfied  that  such
\n     amount of\ttax as the appellant may
\n     admit to  be due  from him has been
\n     paid;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Provided\t further     that    the
\n     prescribed authority  may admit the
\n     appeal  after   the  period  herein
\n     before specified if it is satisfied
\n     that the  appellant had  sufficient
\n     cause for not preferring the appeal
\n     within the said period.
\n     (2) Subject to such rules as may be
\n     made  or\tprocedure  as\tmay   be
\n     prescribed,      the      appellate
\n     authority,\t in   disposing\t of  any
\n     appeal under sub.S(1), may-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (a)  confirm,  reduce,  enhance  or
\n     annual  the   assessment\tor   the
\n     penalty or interest, if any; or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (b) set aside the assessment or the
\n     penalty or\t interest, if  any,  and
\n     direct the\t assessing authority  to
\n     pass  a   fresh  order  after  such
\n     further enquiry as may be directed.
\n     (3) (a)  Any dealer, or as the case
\n     may  be,\tthe  State   Government,
\n     dissatisfied  with\t  an   appellate
\n     order  made   under  sub.S.(2)  may
\n     within sixty  days from the date of
\n     receipt of\t such  order  prefer  an
\n     appeal in\tthe prescribed manner to
\n     the Tribunal against such order :
\n     Provided that  an appeal under this
\n     clause may\t be admitted  after  the
\n     aforesaid period  o limitation,  if
\n     the Tribunal  is satisfied that the
\n     appellant had  sufficient cause for
\n     not preferring  the  appeal  within
\n     such period.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (b)  The\tdealer,\t or   the  State
\n     Government as  the case  may be  on
\n     receipt of\t notice that  an  appeal
\n     has been preferred under C1.(a) may
\n     notwithstanding   that   the   said
\n     dealer or\tthe State Government may
\n     not  have\t appealed  against  such
\n     order or  any part\t thereof, within
\n     sixty days\t of the\t service of  the
\n     notice file  a memorandum\tof cross
\n     objections\t and   such   memorandum
\n     shall  be\t disposed  of\tby   the
\n     Tribunal as  if it\t were an  appeal
\n     presented within time under C1.(a).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (c) While\tdisposing of  an  appeal
\n     under this sub-section the Tribunal
\n     shall have\t the same powers subject
\n     to\t the   same  conditions\t as  are
\n     enumerated\t in  sub.S.(2)\tand  any
\n     order passed under this sub-section
\n     shall, except as otherwise provided
\n     in S. 24, be final.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (4) (a)  Subject to  such rules  as
\n     may be  made and  for reasons to be
\n     Commissioner may,\tupon application
\n     by a dealer or person or on his own
\n     motion revise  any order made under
\n     this  Act\t or   the   rules   made
\n     thereunder by any person other than
\n     the Tribunal appointed under sub-S.
\n     (3) of S. 3 to assist him:
\n     Provided  that   the   Commissioner
\n     shall  not\t  entertain   any   such
\n     application  for  revision\t if  the
\n     dealer or\tthe persons  filing  the
\n     same having  a  remedy  by\t way  of
\n     appeal under  sub-S.   (3) did  not
\n     avail  of\t such  remedy\tor   the
\n     application is not filed within the
\n     prescribed period.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Explanation.     Any      provision
\n     contained\telsewhere  in  this  Act
\n     which provides for determination of
\n     any specific matter shall not debar
\n     the Commissioner  from  determining
\n     such  matter  in  exercise\t of  the
\n     powers  conferred\tupon  him  under
\n     this sub-section.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     A\tperusal\t of  the  aforesaid  provisions\t shows\tthat
\nSection 23 of the Act deals with appeals and revision.\tSub-
\nsection (i)  thereof provides  that any dealer or person may
\nprefer an appeal against the order of assessment or an order
\ndirecting payment  of interest or an order imposing penalty.
\nSub-section (2)\t of Section 23 deals with power of appellate
\nauthority in  disposing\t of  appeals  preferred\t under\tsub-
\nsection (1).   Sub-section  (3)(a) deals  with second appeal
\nwhich enables  any dealer  or State  Government, as the case
\nmay be,\t to prefer  appeal to  the State  Sales Tax Tribunal
\nagainst the  appellate order.\tSection\t 23(4)(a) deals with
\nthe revisional power of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, which
\nmay be\teither suo  motu or  at the  instance of a dealer or
\nperson against\ty order\t passed under the Act. The question,
\ntherefore,  which   requires  consideration  is\t whether  an
\nappellate order\t passed under  sub-section (2) of Section 23
\nof the\tAct comes  within the  ambit of\t the expression “any
\norder made  under the  Act” occurring in Section 23(4)(a) of
\nthe Act.   The\tlanguage used  in Section 23(4)(a) is plain,
\nsimple and  there is no ambiguity in it.  A plain reading of
\nSection 23(4)(a)  Shows that  the expression “any order made
\nunder the  Act” is  of a wise connotation and it includes an
\nassessment order as well as an appellate order\tpassed under
\nthe Act.   This\t construction placed  on the said expression
\nneither runs  contrary to the scheme envisaged in Section 23
\nof the\tAct nor it leads to any undesirable consequences, as
\nobserved by  the High  Court.\tWe are,\t therefore,  of\t the
\nopinion\t that\tunder  Section\t23(4)(a)  of  the  Act,\t the
\nCommissioner  on  his  own  motion  can\t revise\t any  order,
\nincluding an appellate order made under the Act or the Rules
\nby a person other than the tribunal or additional tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
     So far  as the second reasoning given by the High Court
\nthat the proviso to clause (a) of sub-section (4) of Section
\n23 of  the Act\tplaces limitation  on the Commissioner’s suo
\nmotu revisional\t powers to  revise  an\tappellate  order  is
\nconcerned, a  reading of  the aforesaid\t proviso would\tshow
\nthat  the   limitation\ton   the  revisional  power  of\t the
\nCommissioner comes  is only  where a dealer or person filing
\nthe revision  having a\tremedy by  way of  appeal under sub-
\nsection (3)  of Section 23 or the Act, did not avail of such
\nremedy.\t    However,  it  does\tnot  curtail  the  suo\tmotu
\nrevisional power  of the Commissioner of Sales Tax to revise
\nan appellate  order passed  under the  act.   The proviso to
\nSection 23(4)(a)  contemplates that  the Commissioner  shall
\nnote exercise any revisional jurisdiction at the instance of
\na dealer or person when he has a remedy\t by way of an appeal
\nunder sub-section  (3) of  Section 23 of the act.  Thus, the
\nCommissioner is\t not required  to entertain  an\t application
\nunder Section  23(4)(a) of  the Act  if the dealer of person
\ninstead of  filing an  appeal before the appellate authority
\nhas invoked  revisional jurisdiction  of  the  Commissioner.
\nBut, the  same is  not the  position where  the Commissioner
\ndecides to  exercise his suo motu revisional power to revise
\nan appellate  order.   Significantly, the  words “on his own
\nmotion” occurring  in the enactment are conspicuously absent
\nin the\tproviso.  Normally, a proviso is enacted o carve out
\nsomething special out of the general enactment or to qualify
\nwhat is\t in the\t enactment.   By enacting  the\tproviso\t the
\nlegislature has\t excluded the revisional jurisdiction of the
\nCommissioner Sales  Tax to  revise  an\tappellate  order  if
\ninvoked at  the instance  of a\tdealer or  person when\tsuch
\ndealer or  person has  a remedy\t by way\t of  an\t appeal.  As
\nnoticed earlier, the limitation on the suo motu power of the
\nCommissioner as\t to revise  an appellate  order has not been
\nexpressly provided  in the  proviso.\tIn  absence  of\t any
\nexpressed provisions, no limitation on suo motu power of the
\nCommissioner to\t revise an  appellate order  can be implied.
\nWe, accordingly\t hold that the provisions of proviso to sub-
\nsection (4)(a)\tof Section 23 of the act do not prohibit the
\nCommissioner to exercise suo motu revisional power to revise
\nan appellate order.\n<\/p>\n
     For the  foregoing reasons,  we are  satisfied that the
\nHigh Court  fell in  error in  quashing the impugned notices
\nand allowing the writ petition of the respondent herein.  We
\naccordingly set\t aside the   order  and judgment of the High
\nCourt dated  12.2.1996 in  O.J.C.. Nos.\t 4496 &\t 4497\/95 and
\nallow the appeals.  There shall be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
     In view  of the  decision in  Civil Appeal\t Nos……of
\n1997 (arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 23581 and 23972\/1996) are
\nalso allowed, with no order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & … vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997 Author: V Khare Bench: S.P. Bharucha, V.N. Khare PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX ORISSA & ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: M\/S. HALARI STORE ETC. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26\/09\/1997 BENCH: S.P. BHARUCHA, V.N. KHARE ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: THE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-105765","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nCommissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & ... vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & ... vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1997-09-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-02T00:16:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & … vs M\\\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997\",\"datePublished\":\"1997-09-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-02T00:16:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997\"},\"wordCount\":2642,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997\",\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & ... vs M\\\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1997-09-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-02T00:16:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & … vs M\\\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & ... vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & ... vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1997-09-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-02T00:16:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & … vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997","datePublished":"1997-09-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-02T00:16:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997"},"wordCount":2642,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997","name":"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & ... vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1997-09-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-02T00:16:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-sales-tax-orissa-vs-ms-halari-store-etc-on-26-september-1997#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner Of Sales Tax Orissa & … vs M\/S. Halari Store Etc on 26 September, 1997"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105765","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=105765"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105765\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=105765"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=105765"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=105765"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}