TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reassessment orders were passed in the present case, the AO did not have the power of re-assessment. Consequently, the above question is required to be answered in the negative i.e, in favour of the Assessee and against the Department. In that view of the matter, the impugned reassessment orders of the AO are hereby set aside and the original assessment orders which were interfered with by the Tribunal are restored to file. It must be added here that in the original assessment orders, the AO had accepted the case of the Assessee that the inter-branch transfers were in fact not inter-State sales. Revision petition disposed off. - TREV Nos.148 and 149 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 18-1-2023 - DR. S. MURALIDHAR CHIEF JUSTICE AND M.S. RAMAN, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le 10 of the CST (O) Rules. This question was perhaps not in the purview of the issues that arose when the aforementioned reference was made by the Tribunal because the law in this regard was clarified only subsequently by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ashok Leyland Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 2004 SC 2836 . In the said judgment which is by a Bench of three Hon ble Judges of Supreme Court, a categorical view was taken that once an assessment order has been passed under Section 6 (A) (2) of the CST Act, it could not be subject matter of reopening of the assessment under the State Act. The Larger Bench of the Supreme Court in the above decision held observations to the contrary made in the earlier judgment in Ashok Leyland ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Limited v. Union of India (supra) and concluded in paragraph 113 and 114 as under: 113. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the observations made by this Court in Ashok Leyland (supra) to the effect that an order passed under Sub-Section (2) of Section 6A can be subject matter of reopening of a proceeding under Section 16 of the State Act was not correct. 114. However, we may hasten to add that the same would not mean that even wherein such an order has been obtained by commission of fraud, collusion, misrepresentation or suppression of material facts or giving or furnishing false particulars, the order being vitiated in law would not come within the purview of the aforementioned principle. 8. Considering that the law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
