9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (8) TMI 128X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e U.P. Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69 at 7 per cent on account of a notification issued under section 3-A of the Act. He filed two separate appeals against the two assessment orders in question. The appeals were to be accompanied by satisfactory proof of the payment of tax as provided by the first proviso to section 9 of the Act. It appears that the petitioner had earli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner's contention that he was entitled to the adjustment of the refund against the admitted tax. The appellate authority passed an order dated 17th October, 1971, declaring the appeals to be in order. Thereafter, the Sales Tax Officer again agitated the question before the appellate authority that the petitioner's appeals were not competent for want of deposit of admitted tax. The appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were defective. The petitioner has challenged this order. He has also challenged the validity of the Amendment Act. So far as the second contention, namely, the one relating to validity of the Amendment Act is concerned, the same must be rejected in view of the decision of this court in Mohan Lal Verma v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another[1972] 29 S.T.C. 398., where a Division Bench of this Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Works Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner[1968] 21 S.T.C. 154 (S.C.)., the question as to whether an appeal is entertainable or not is to be decided when the appeal is first taken up for hearing. Once the appeals were admitted as proper appeals they could not be dismissed on the ground that by reason of a subsequent change in law the petitioner was not entitled to the refund claimed by him. Moreover, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
