TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x dismissed the petitioner's revision petition and did not take on record the S.T. 1 forms which were sought to be submitted. In respect of assessment year 1982-83, the petitioner claimed that sales had been made by it to registered dealers against S.T. 1 forms. The assessment was completed in 1987 but the S.T. 1 forms were not produced. The petitioner then filed a revision petition challengin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner had been asking M/s. Kamal Engineering to hand over S.T. 1 forms. The assessment was made on 17th March, 1987 and S.T. 1 forms were presumably received after the last date of hearing before the Sales Tax Officer. The State is entitled to the tax which is legitimately due to it. When the Sales Tax Act provides that a deduction can be claimed in respect of sales effected in favour of r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not due to inaction of the petitioner. We, therefore, issue a writ of certiorari quashing the aforesaid order dated 10th August, 1989, passed by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax in Revision No. 28/88-89 and further issue a writ of mandamus directing the said authority to rehear the revision petition after taking on record the S.T. 1 forms furnished by the petitioner. The writ petition s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
