9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (6) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ermine in this proceeding is whether the Sales Tax Tribunal was justified in extending the time prescribed for filing an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Sales Tax Officer assessed the respondents by an order dated 6th October, 1965, which was served on them on the same day. Section 55(4) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, prescribes a period of 60 days for filing a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, asking that two questions be referred to the High Court was dismissed by the Tribunal. This petition is therefore filed by the Commissioner under the proviso to section 61(1). The two questions which the petitioner raises on this petition are: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the conclusion of the Tribunal that there was sufficien ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from this position, the Tribunal seems to us to be justified in the view which it has taken. The contention of the respondents is that it was only after the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in Khosla's case[1966] 17 S.T.C. 473 (S.C.). on the 18th of January, 1966, that they could think of filing an appeal against the order dated 6th October, 1965, of the Sales Tax Officer. The judgment of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 S.T.C. 446 (S.C.)., the tax was recovered illegally by the Government. The Supreme Court held that the Sales Tax Act was a self-contained code, that section 20 was a bar to the suit and that the proper remedy for the assessee was either to file an appeal or to apply for revision and ask for condonation of delay on the ground that the mistake which was responsible for the recovery of the tax ill ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
