9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (2) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax on the purchase of cotton at the rate of four per cent and passed the assessment order on February 7, 1978. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Patiala, for rectification of the assessment order on the ground that the sales tax on the purchase of cotton during the relevant period, i.e., from July 1, 1975 to March 28, 1976, was only three per cent and it was subsequently enhanced to four per cent by notification issued on March 29, 1976. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the rate of purchase tax should have been assessed at the rate of three per cent for the purchases made by the petitioner during the period from July 1, 1975 to March 28, 1976, as the notification en ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Board to remedy any injustice. It is open to an assessee or the Revenue to bring to the notice of the Board any error made by the subordinate authorities. It is up to the Board to consider whether the case is a fit case for exercising its revisional jurisdiction. If the Board had gone into the case and come to the conclusion that there was no justification for exercising its jurisdiction under section 34, then in the absence of any vitiating circumstance recognised by law, the High Court would not have interfered with the discretion of the Board. But what has happened in this case is that the Board had refused to exercise its jurisdiction under the erroneous view that in view of the dismissal of the assessee s appeal it was not compete ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... July 1, 1975 to March 28, 1976. It is also not controverted that the rate of tax has been enhanced to four per cent with effect from March 29, 1976. Therefore, the Assessing Authority cannot impose tax at the rate of four per cent for the purchase made prior to March 29, 1976. The Assessing Authority has, thus, clearly committed an error in imposing tax at the rate of four per cent on the purchases made by the petitioner prior to March 29, 1976. This is a patent error on the admitted facts. The Commissioner should have himself corrected the mistake instead of driving the party to further proceedings and putting it into unnecessary expenditure to approach this Court. 7.. Writ petition is accordingly allowed and the Assessing Authority is d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
