Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

1992 (9) TMI 328

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....DRI, J.-The appellant deals in cast iron goods and also carries out works contracts. He was a dealer on the rolls of the Commercial Tax Officer, X Circle, Hyderabad for the year 1977-78. In the said year the Commercial Tax Officer proposed to assess sales tax on a sum of Rs. 5,79.042.40 which the assessee claimed as receipts from works contracts. In support of his claim no material was placed befo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncerned, the Deputy Commissioner reduced the rate from 25 per cent to 10 per cent. This order of the revisional authority was revised by the Commissioner under section 20 of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, by order dated January 8, 1986. The Commissioner held that there was no material before the revisional authority, viz., the Deputy Commissioner to treat the sum of Rs. 5,79,042.40 as receipts fr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... He therefore set aside the order of the Deputy Commissioner. It is the correctness of this order of the Commissioner dated January 8, 1986 that is assailed in this special appeal. On a perusal of the order under appeal, we are convinced that the order of the Commissioner does not suffer from any illegality. There was no adequate justification for the Deputy Commissioner to interfere in revision ....