9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (7) TMI 382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 10,93,540, Rs. 16,34,690 and Rs. 25,81,726 by separate orders dated 21st July, 1979, 30th July, 1979 and 5th March, 1981 respectively for the aforesaid assessment years. The petitioner, it is stated, bona fide believed that the levy of additional tax on the purchases made under section 6-A of the Act was legal and did not file any appeals. It is stated that when the petitioner met his auditor in January, 1983, in connection with some other appeals, he was informed of the decision of this Court in the case of Hindustan Milkfood Manufacturers Ltd. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1982] 51 STC 1 wherein it was held that section 5-A of the Act levying additional tax cannot be considered to cover the turnover tax under section 6-A of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... determined for purposes of section 6-A of the Act. Section 5-A of the Act at the relevant time read as under: "5-A. Levy of additional tax on turnover.-Every dealer who is liable to pay tax under section 5 shall, in addition to the tax payable under that section, pay for each year a tax at the rate of one-fourth paisa, on every rupee of his turnover liable to tax, if his total turnover for that year is rupees three lakhs or more." It may be mentioned that sections 5-A and 6-A of the Act have since been amended with effect from 1st July, 1985 by the Andhra Pradesh Act No. 18 of 1985. But we are not concerned with the provisions as they are now but we are concerned with the provisions as they were during the relevant assessment years. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Division Bench in Hindustan Milkfood's case [1982] 52 STC 1 (AP), the first prayer, as we have noticed, is not being pressed and only the second prayer is pressed on behalf of the assessee. The learned Government Pleader, however, submits that this Court should not entertain the present writ petition under article 226 since a remedy of appeal is provided under section 23 of the Act to the High Court itself within sixty days from the date the order of the Commissioner is communicated to the assessee and he brought to our notice, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Orissa [1983] 53 STC 315; AIR 1983 SC 603 and submitted that the Supreme Court has laid down as a rule that whenever ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is case this Court should entertain the present writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution. It will be noticed that no citizen can be deprived of his property without the authority of law. If it is a civil suit of the nature contemplated by the facts of the present case, it would not be barred under the provisions of section 36 of the Act. Section 36 of the Act bars jurisdiction of civil courts in the following cases: "36. Bar of jurisdiction of courts.-Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, no court shall entertain any suit, or other proceeding to set aside or modify, or question the validity of any assessment, order or decision made or passed by any officer or authority under this Act or any rules made thereunder, or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
