TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 490X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r parties in the State of Karnataka through banking and wheeling of energy generated with the Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. The Government issued a licence to M/s. Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd., in the matter of generation of power. Agreements were entered into and thereafter the appellant started generation of power using high speed diesel and since 1997, it has been using furnace oil as a raw material for the said activity. The furnace oil was initially procured from M/s. Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Chennai and M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., Goa. Besides causing the entry of furnace oil, the appellant has also been causing the entry of goods, among others such as high speed diesel and lube oil, etc. The assessing a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raising the following questions of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case: 1.. The revisional authority was justified in law in dwelling upon a topic which was not the subject-matter of the appeal considered by the first appellate authority, whose order was sought to be suo motu revised under section 15(2) of the Act? 2.. The revisional authority was justified in considering the aspect of refund of taxes especially in the light of the fact that the application for rectification of mistake apparent on the face of record was pending consideration before the assessing authority? 3.. The revisional authority was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that the appellant has passed on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment order has already been passed and that therefore the revisional authority could not have set aside that order in the light of the appellate order having been acted upon by the parties in the case on hand. He would further argue that a look at the order of the appellate authority would show that the appellate authority has not considered any issues on merits for the purpose of prejudice to the State in terms of section 15 of the Act. He therefore wants an interference. Per contra, learned counsel for the State would say that the revisional authority was justified in the light of the order passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. She would say that what is impermissible in law is done by the assessing officer and that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case on hand. That order was challenged before the Joint Commissioner. The Joint Commissioner after noticing the contentions has come to a categorical conclusion on facts that before the expiry of the time asked for producing the books of account, the assessing authority has passed the ex parte order, which is not correct. He, in those circumstances, set aside the ex parte order and remanded the matter back for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The said order in our view does not deal with the merits of the matter. The order was passed only in the light of violation of rules of natural justice. That cannot be construed as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in terms of section 15 of the Act. In fact, a similar contention was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
