9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer, the assessee claimed exemption of Rs. 44,227.17 and Rs. 23,267.01, totalling to Rs. 67,494.18, since the sales were not fructified. 2.. The assessment year involved in this revision is 1976-77. The assessing officer found that out of the claim for Rs. 44,227.17, the claim for Rs. 24,713.79 is barred as it related to the assessment year 1975-76. Similarly in respect of detergent (branch) t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is in revision before this Court. 3.. Learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) submitted that inasmuch as the assessee has not claimed exemption in the assessment year 1975-76, during which assessment year the goods were returned, the assessee cannot claim exemption in the subsequent year as per the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contention of the department that the return of the tax can be claimed within six months from the date of return of the goods as per the decision of this Court on this aspect and the provisions contained in rule 5B of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959. But, the assessee submitted that the goods which were returned in the assessment year 1975-76 were sold in the assessment year 1976 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g that the assessee has to be blamed for the same. In any event, the Revenue is not entitled to get the tax collected twice on the same goods while the goods are exigible to tax on a single point. But we may make it clear that we are not basing our decision on this ground alone. We are satisfied that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the principles laid down by this Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
