1960 (11) TMI 109

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nder that enactment the ban imposed by Article 286 on the levy of tax on inter-State sales was lifted so that what were called "explanation sales" could be taxed if the appropriate State Legislature provided for that. The Deputy Commissioner, Coimbatore, purporting to exercise the revisional powers vested in him by section 12 of the Act, issued a notice to the assessee to show cause why the order of the Commercial Tax Officer dated 24th December, 1955, should not be revised, and why the turnover of Rs. 7,87,671-2-0, which had been exempted from tax by the Commercial Tax Officer, should not be subjected to the levy of sales tax at the appropriate rate. The Deputy Commissioner eventually overruled the objections of the assessee and revised th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ench. At page 328, it was pointed out: ".......... in cases where the entire turnover of an assessee is before the assessing authority and is considered by it and such authority by error of fact or law treats the turnover or any part thereof as not assessable or grants a deduction or exemption to which the assessee is not entitled under the Act, the case is not one of escaped turnover but of an improper or illegal assessment order which is revisable under rule 14(2)." Revisional jurisdiction in the present case was exercised under section 12(2) of the Act, but the principle remains the same. The Tribunal was thus in error in treating it as a case of escaped turnover. Incidentally, we have to point out that, even if it had been the escap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the original order. Judged by that test, the original order of assessment finalised by the Commercial Tax Officer was wrong, because if what was enacted by Act VII of 1956 was the law on the date of the original assessment, the original assessment was illegal. Learned counsel for the respondent-assessee urged that the ambit of section 12(2) was more circumscribed than that for instance of section 12-B of the Act, and that the order of the Commercial Tax Officer should not be characterised either as illegal or improper when it was correct and consistent with the law as it stood on that date. But that contention we must negative in view of what we have stated obove. The principle laid down in Venkatachala v. Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X