9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 561X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... monofilament and knitted fabrics. It has its head office at Mumbai and branches at different places including the one at Chennai. In respect of the returns filed for the assessment year 1994-95, the petitioner claimed exemption on the turnover relating to the sale of fish knitted fabrics. The second respondent herein, the Commercial Tax Officer, Chennai, rejected the plea of the assessee for exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment order. In its petition dated January 19, 1999, the petitioner placed reliance on the circular of the Special Commissioner dated September 16, 1995 in L. Dis. 147755/85 and the decision of the Bombay High Court in Sainet Private Ltd. v. Union of India reported in [1984] 18 ELT 141 that the fish-knitted fabric is exempt under the Third Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Special Tribunal in O.P. No. 1619 of 1996 dated March 5, 1998 and to direct the second respondent to consider the claim for exemption in the light of the law laid down by the apex court in the decision in Nylon Net Manufacturing Company v. Additional Sales Tax Officer reported in [2008] 16 VST 16; [1998] 9 SCC 98. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Tribunal erre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that in view of the alternative remedy available, the original petition could not be taken up by the Tribunal. It is a matter of fact that the assessee did not seek any further clarification from the Tribunal to exclude the time taken for filing the original petition to enable the assessee to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority. Having regard to the fact that the assessee had gone befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
