9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (8) TMI 554X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner (appellant herein) was whether there was any proceeding recorded within the meaning of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, enabling the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the assessee ) to file revision under section 36 against exhibit P11 demand notice. 3.. The assessee claimed refund of Rs. 23,364. By exhibit P3 order dated July 6, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. It is the contention of the assessee that he disputed the said demand on the ground that refund of Rs. 23,364 was allowed to him. But despite that the said amount was not adjusted in the assessment order and the interest demand was wrongly raised. 4.. Aggrieved the assessee filed a revision under section 36, which was dismissed by the authority saying that there being no order or recorded pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... note appended to exhibit P11 demand notice, falls within the expression proceedings recorded , occurring in sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Act. In Governor-General in Council v. Shiromani Sugar Mills Ltd. [1946] 14 ITR 248 (FC); AIR 1946 FC 16, the court held that action on the part of the income-tax authorities for recovery could amount to proceedings for the collection of arrears. The Con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the departmental authorities took steps to recover the liability determined as sales tax and that was duly recorded in the demand notice itself. Ordinarily, a demand notice does not record any proceeding. But in exhibit P11 demand notice, the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Sales Tax, clearly recorded the proceedings to recover penal interest to the tune of Rs. 10,898.75. The note app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
