9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (7) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 22(2) of the Act for an alleged illegal collection of surcharge on the first sales of mustard in the year of assessment. An appeal was preferred before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Madurai against the assessment order. The appellate authority sustained a part of the addition to the taxable turnover but set aside the levy of penalty imposed by the assessing authority under section 22(2) of the Act. The assessee preferred a second appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Tribunal allowed the appeal and accepted the book turnover of the assessee. It appears that the Joint Commissioner proposed to revise the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and after iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 78] 42 STC 263. The Bench laid down as follows: "Section 34(2)(b) of the Act is a complete ban preventing the Board of Revenue from acting and exercising the power of revision under section 34 once an appeal has been taken from the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to the Tribunal even though the point dealt with by the Board is not a matter covered by the appeal grounds taken by the assessee before the Tribunal. During the period provided for an appeal, the hands of the Board of Revenue are tied as is clear from section 34(2)(a) and this temporary ban becomes a permanent one once an appeal has been taken under that section. Under the scheme of the Act though the Revenue cannot appeal from the order of the Appellate Assistant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the claim of the assessee in respect of one item and granted relief to the assessee in respect of the other three items. The assessee preferred an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner disallowing one item and the Tribunal allowed that appeal. Subsequently the Board of Revenue issued a notice to the assessee in exercise of its suo motu power of revision under section 34 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, proposing to revise the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in respect of the items on which the relief was granted by him on the ground that even such items were liable to be taxed by virtue of a Supreme Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing split up into different orders dealing with different items of reliefs claimed by the dealer and granted or rejected by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner but treats the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as a single order not capable of being dissected into different pieces. In an appeal preferred by a dealer under section 36 of the Act there is scope for the department intervening and calling upon the Tribunal to enhance the assessment or penalty and, in view of this, there is no justification to confer an independent power of revision on the Board of Revenue after the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has been made the subject of an appeal. Therefore the Division Bench was right in holding in Jeewanlal [1929 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
