9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (3) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1941 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1941") and paid additional sales tax to the extent of Rs. 3,33,231.62 which is payable on rice bran oil. A total sum to the tune of Rs. 40,15,078 thus was paid by the petitioner. 3.. The assessment was made by respondent No. 1 without deducting the additional sales tax and delivery charges. Purchase tax on the sale of gunny bags was also levied though those are exempted from tax. The contention of the petitioner was that since rice bran oil is edible oil there cannot be any levy of additional sales tax. 4.. An appeal was preferred against the order of assessment on the ground that the rejection of the prayer of exemption of delivery charges was totally illegal, and also that of additional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellate authority before the Appellate and Revisional Board (in short, "the Board") challenging the finding of respondent No. 2 on the issue as to whether rice bran oil is edible oil or not. The Board by an order dated December 17, 1997 rejected the revisional application of the petitioner and confirmed the order of the respondent No. 2 in so far as it related to levy of additional sales tax on rice bran oil. Thus, the question of payment of additional tax on rice bran oil has been finally decided by the Board by the said order dated December 17, 1997 though other disputes, such as, exemption of tax on gunny bags, delivery charges, disallowing the opportunity for production of declaration forms, etc., still remained undecided. 10.. Respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decided the other issues on the merits as per direction of the appellate authority, since the order of assessment was set aside. According to law such fresh assessment on all other points except levy of additional tax on rice bran oil should have been disposed of within four years from the date of order of remand passed by the appellate authority on December 29, 1995 but this was not done. The additional tax on rice bran oil had also been paid by the petitioner in the meantime. In such circumstances, the order of issuance of garnishee notice in respect of the dues arising out of assessment order being bad in law is liable to be set aside. Though respondent No. 2 in his subsequent appellate order dated July 25, 1996 confirmed the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the superior forum; as such, there was no scope for further assessment. The contention of the learned lawyer for the petitioner that the assessing authority shall comply the first appellate order and hold reassessment even after his order was confirmed by a second appellate order is misconceived and cannot be accepted. The learned assessing authority has rightly initiated garnishee proceeding against the petitioner inasmuch as, the assessment order stands. This application, according to the learned State Representative, has no merits for consideration and is liable to be dismissed. 15.. The points for consideration, therefore, are: (1) If the order dated July 25, 1996 passed by respondent No. 2 decides the entire appeal and if t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner went on revision before the Tribunal for a direction for disposal of the issue singly on merits by the learned Deputy Commissioner. The Tribunal accordingly directed the learned Deputy Commissioner to dispose of the issue of taxability of rice bran oil with a definite and positive finding. 18.. The second appellate order, therefore, was passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner on July 25, 1996 in terms of the direction of the Tribunal deciding finally that rice bran oil sold by the dealer was not of edible grade. He, therefore, concluded "In the result, the assessment order dated June 21, 1995 passed by the learned Assistant Commissioner, P.B. Charge, is, therefore, confirmed". 19.. The contention of the learned lawyer for the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted June 21, 1995. His order dated July 25, 1996 in the tune of his previous findings made on December 29, 1995 should have been clear and transparent that is to say, he should have given clear direction to the assessing authority for deciding the undecided issues accepting that rice bran oil is not oil of edible grade as was decided by him subsequently. But it was not done, as such the question of interpretation of the results of two orders has cropped in. Since the subsequent order of the appellate authority confirming the order of the assessing authority was prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner, in our opinion, he should have agitated the matter in the revisional forum for proper modification of the order of the appellate author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
