TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 838X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1859 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 17-4-2009 - K. Raviraja Pandian And M. M. Sundresh,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. Haza Nazirudeen Special Government Pleader (T) ORDER (Order of the Court was made by K. Raviraja Pandian, J.) The Revenue is on revision against the order of the Tribunal made in Tribunal State Appeal No.115/1999 in respect of Sri Alaggar Traders, dated 3.10.2001 by formulating the following Substantial Question of Law. Whether the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally right in affirming the order of the First Appellate Authority in respect of allowance of the claim of second sale exemption even when the registration number of the socalled seller belonged to some other dealer ? 2. The m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t 150% under Section 16(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act (in short the Act ) in a sum of Rs.1,07,657/-. That revision order was set aside by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on appeal at the instance of the assessee on the ground that the selling dealer had been registered with the Department with effect from 1994-95 and had renewed the Registration Certificate for the subsequent assessement years 1995-96 and 1996-97. Though the said dealer had not filed A1 monthly returns for these years, the Assessing Officer has not taken any steps to trace out this seller but treated them as a bill trader and assessed the appellant, which is contrary to various decisions of this Court. The Revenue's further appeal to the Tribunal was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, has reversed the finding of the Assessing Officer by giving reason that the assessement of the assesee has been revised and the second sales has been exempted in the original assessement order and disallowed the claim for the reason that the seller Karpaga Vinayaga Trader had left the place without submitting the accounts for the year 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97. Despite the fact that the Registration Certificate of Karpaga Vinayaga Traders has been renewed for the above said years, the said dealer did not file any monthly returns and had not submitted the accounts for the final check. The conclusion so arrived at by the Assessing Officer was totally incorrect that the selling dealer had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces, this Court in the case of GOVINDAN CO., V. STATE OF TAMIL NADU reported in (1975) 35 STC 50, has held that to claim the benefit of tax on the ground that the sales effected by the assessees are second sales, the assessee need not show that their sellers have infact paid tax. It is enough for them to show that the earlier sales are taxable sales and that the tax is really payable by their sellers. 8. Likewise, in the case of STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. CHAMUNDESWARI ENTERPRISES reported in (1983) 52 STC 124, the Division Bench of this Court has held that if a sale effected by an assessee is not a first sale, which is only taxable under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act,1959 then under the provisions of the Act, that sale cannot be b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
