9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (9) TMI 572X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner for the periods ending 31st March, 1988, 30th September, 1988 and 31st March, 1989 was assessed by the Superintendent of Taxes and petitioner submitted return and the assessing officer assessed the same under section 17(3) of the Assam Sales Tax Act read with Central Sales Tax Act holding turnover nil giving exemption under 1986 incentive scheme. The Assistant Commissioner of Taxes by memo dated 9th May, 1971 intimated the petitioner that the benefit of tax for the periods as mentioned above under section 3A was erroneously given though the petitioner was not entitled for such concession. He was accordingly directed to appear before the Assistant Commissioner to show cause as to why the assessments should not be cancelled and the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atter. Under these circumstances in my opinion the tax will be leviable under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for your inter-State sales for the period ending 30th May, 1988, 30th September, 1988 and 31 March, 1989. However, you are given another chance to produce materials in support of your case on 15th July, 1992 at 11 a.m. failing which necessary orders will be passed as per provision of the present Act for levy of tax under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for these periods." 2.. By order dated 31st July, 1992 the Assistant Commissioner accordingly directed to complete the assessment as per the aforesaid order. The order of the Assistant Commissioner is not happily worded however and by itself it will not make the proceeding faulty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s argument further submitted that even the decision in Mahavir Coke Industries [1995] 97 STC 186 of this Court was sought to be reviewed by the State Government and even after the review of the judgment of the Pine Chemicals the Supreme Court however turned down the SLP filed by the State of Assam. 6.. Dr. Saraf in support of his submission brought my attention to the photo copy of the order of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court only dismissed the SLP in limine and no legal question as such was decided. The decision of rejection of SLP cannot be a ground to overlook the law laid down by the Supreme Court in review petition (Commissioner of Sales Tax v. Pine Chemicals Ltd. reported in [1995] 96 STC 355; (1995) 1 SCC 58) and the Supreme C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
