TMI Blog1980 (1) TMI 193X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee was assessed to tax on a turnover of Rs. 37,05,572.97 on 26th June, 1971. The assessee appealed against this assessment relating to certain sales of what are called workmen stores, to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and thereafter to the Tribunal. It appears that the assessing authority had left out a sum of Rs. 2,50,019.21 representing the sale value of gunnies, discarded machinery ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions and he, therefore, included the sum of Rs. 2,50,019.21 and brought it to tax at 3 per cent. The assessee appealed to the Tribunal. One of the contentions taken before the Tribunal was that the assessment order was the subject-matter of appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and that it could not be the subject of revisional jurisdiction by the Deputy Commissioner in view of sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Full Bench in Tax Case No. 342 of 1975 [Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. Board of Revenue, Madras [1981] 47 STC 155 (FB)]. In view of this well-established position, the revisional jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner was not exercisable in the present case, and the Tribunal was right in its conclusion regarding the legality of the order of the Deputy Commissioner. The revision accordingly fails and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
