9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog1981 (1) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal under section 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax is as follows: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in coming to the conclusion, that the suo motu revision order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax on 23rd October, 1969, under section 57 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondents to show cause why the order of the Sales Tax Officer should not be revised so as to include in it the said turnover of Rs. 66,866. Pursuant to this notice the respondents appeared before the Assistant Commissioner. They did not contend that these sales were liable to be taxed (sic). In fact, it was throughout the admitted position that the turnover of these sales was taxable. What ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contention was negatived and the respondents' appeal dismissed. The respondents then went in second appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that this was a case of either reopening the assessment under section 35 or of rectifying a mistake apparent from the record under section 62, but it was not a case in which revisional powers under section 57 could be invoked. The Tribunal allowed the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the assessment proceedings, if not also with illegality. In the case of Swastik Oil Mills Ltd. v. H.B. Munshi, Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bombay[1968] 21 S.T.C. 383 at 395-396 (S.C.)., the Supreme Court held: "Whenever a power is conferred on an authority to revise an order, the authority is entitled to examine the correctness, legality and propriety of the order and to pass such suita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
