9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 874X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u General Sales Tax Act, 1959 against the order of the Joint Commissioner made in suo motu revision dated October 1, 1996. In that revision, the Joint Commissioner restored the revision of assessment made by the assessing officer along with penalty, which were set aside by the first appellate authority. The facts are: The assessee is a dealer in groundnut kernel. For the assessment year 1990-91, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that during the relevant period the said Senthilvel had got his registration certificate renewed and on further ground that the goods were passed through the check-post, which was evident from the goods vehicle record. The Joint Commissioner, while exercising his suo motu revision power having found that the order of the first appellate authority is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der by the Department. It is on record that in respect of another dealer Tvl. Vijayalakshmi and Co., Mulanur and Sri Palani Andawar Mills, Mulanur, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, while considering the purchases made from the very same Senthilvel, rejected the claim of second sale exemption on the sole ground that the said Senthilvel was only a bill trader and he never dealt with the goods, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le exemption on a finding recorded that the said Senthilvel is only a bill trader. Thus, the voluminous materials available with the Department show that the said Senthilvel, the alleged seller is only a bill trader and he never dealt with any goods. When that being the factual position, the claim of second sale exemption by the assessee on the ground that the first sale is effected by the said Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
