9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (4) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sales Tax Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for reviewing the orders of the Tribunal made in these appeals. The Tribunal by its common order dated 29th April, 1971, reviewed its earlier orders, dismissed one application for review and allowed the other application in part. It is against the order of the Tribunal allowing C.T.A. No. 12 of 1970 in part, the present revision has been filed purporting to be under section 38(1) of the Act. As soon as the learned Additional Government Pleader opened the case for the taxing authority, the learned counsel for the assessee took a preliminary objection contending that the revision case itself was not maintainable. Since we agree with his contention, it is not necessary to go into the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court will prima facie show that before the amendment such an order was not subject to the revision to the High Court. Admittedly, the order which was passed by the Tribunal which has been taken to this court in the present revision case is an order passed by the Tribunal prior to the amendment. However, the learned Additional Government Pleader contended that even without any reference to section 36(6) in section 38, an order of the Tribunal reviewing its earlier order is subject to revision under section 38(1), as it stood even before its amendment by Tamil Nadu Act No. 31 of 1972. The reason for this contention is that section 36(6) of the Act which provides for the application for review of the Tribunal's order does not itself c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be produced by him when the order was made: Provided that no such application shall be preferred more than once in respect of the same order." Section 36(6)(b) states: "The application for review shall be preferred in the prescribed manner and within one year from the date on which a copy of the order to which the application relates was served on the applicant in the manner prescribed and where the application is preferred by any party other than a departmental authority, it shall be accompanied by such fee not exceeding one hundred rupees as may be prescribed." In this context it is necessary to refer to sub-sections (8) and (9) of section 36 and they are as follows: "(8) Every order passed by the Appellate Tribunal under subs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gument of the learned Additional Government Pleader that the statute does not contemplate the Tribunal passing a separate order under section 36(6) and even the order passed by the Tribunal on a review application will be an order only under section 36(3). To accept the contention of the Learned Additional Government Pleader will be to ignore the express language contained not only in the amending Act, namely, Tamil Nadu Act No. 31 of 1972, but also, even before this amendment, in sub-section (8) of section 36. In view of this, we are clearly of the opinion that the statute contemplates the Tribunal passing different orders, one under sub-section (3) of section 36 when it originally disposes of the appeal and the other under sub-section (6) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
