TMI Blog1973 (5) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter taking into consideration the purchases made by the assessee and adding profits, came to the conclusion that the assessee became liable to pay tax with effect from 26th January, 1966. For coming to this conclusion the Assessing Authority took Rs. 40,000 as the taxable quantum which the assessee had exceeded during the year 1965-66. At the same time, he actually assessed the turnover for the various years as under: 1965-66 ... Rs. 54,000 1966-67 ... Rs. 67,000 1967-68 ... Rs. 83,000 1968-69 ... Rs. 1,03,500 and taxed the assessee accordingly. The assessee filed appeals against the actual assessments as well as against the finding of the Assessing Authority that the assessee became liable, as a dealer under the Act, to pay ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estimates should not be blind shot in the dark as appears to be the case in the appeal before me." After discussing a few points that were raised before the Director of Inspections, he concluded as under: "In view of the foregoing discussion I set aside the impugned orders and send back the cases to the Assessing Authority for fresh disposal in the light of observations made above. He should take such further evidence as is furnished by the appellant or by the respondent and draw his conclusions having regard to the evidence." From the above it is quite clear that so far as the assessment, inter alia, of 1965-66, which was made at a figure Rs. 54,000, was concerned, it was set aside by the Director of Inspections. The assessee had als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of tax with effect from 15th March, 1966, after the expiry of grace period of 30 days............" Consequently, he fixed the liability to payment of sales tax with effect from 15th March, 1966. The Sales Tax Tribunal, on a further appeal being taken to it, upheld the order of the Director of Inspections. On an application being made by the assessee, the following two questions of law have been referred for decision by this court: "(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, liability to pay tax with effect from 15th March, 1966, could be maintained in spite of the fact that the assessment orders were set aside by the appellate authority? (b) Whether liability to pay tax fixed with effect from 15th March, 1966, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment order relating to the year 1965-66 has been passed, after compliance with the observations of the appellate authority, there is no material on the basis of which the date with effect from which the liability of the assessee is to arise under the Act, can be determined. It is clear, therefore, that this order of the appellate authority fixing the liability of the assessee to pay tax with effect from 15th March, 1966, is based on no material whatever. In fact, the finding given in this case, that the liability to pay tax arises with effect from 15th March, 1966, by taking the figure of the turnover for the year 1965-66 as Rs. 54,000, runs counter to the finding of the appellate authority in the other case in which he found that there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
