1998 (11) TMI 544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....   T.L.V. Iyer, Senior Advocate (G. Prakash and Mrs. Beena Prakash, Advocates, with him), for the appellant in C.A. No. 2428 of 1997.   Debi Pal, Senior Advocate (E.M.S. Anam and Fazlin Anam, Advocates, with him), for respondent No. 1.   G. Prakash and Mrs. Beena Prakash, Advocates, for the appellants in C.A. Nos. 2429 to 2449 of 1997.   ------------------------------------ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... der this material. The respondents-assessees moved the High Court in tax revision cases. The High Court considered the material and reached the conclusion that standing rubber trees were not timber and, therefore, not exigible to sales tax under the provisions of the said Act. 2.. There can be no doubt that, in the circumstances, the Tribunal should have considered the materials that were placed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... all decide, based thereon, whether rubber trees are timber for the purposes of the levy of sales tax under the said Act. The Tribunal shall give to the parties the opportunity to produce additional material/ evidence. It shall decide the matters within six months from today.   The appeals are allowed accordingly. No order as to costs.   Appeals allowed. Matters remanded to Tribunal.&nb .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X