9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is dismissed. - Writ Petition No. 202 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 12-9-2007 - RAVIRAJA PANDIAN K. AND CHITRA VENKATARAMAN , JJ. ORDER:- The order of the court was made by MRS. CHITRA VENKATARAMAN J. The writ petition is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal allowing O.P. No. 474 of 2002, wherein, the assessee challenged the reassessment proceedings on the ground that the same are hit by the limitation provided under section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The assessment year relates to 1994-95. It is stated that the assessment order was originally passed on April 29, 1996, wherein, the taxability on the sales of REP licence was considered and the turnover exempted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of provision of section 16(4) of the Act in computing the period of limitation for assessment or reassessment under section 16, the period of pendency of the writ petition, which was disposed thereafterwards, need to be excluded and thereby the proceedings would be saved by limitation provided under section 16(2). We heard the submission of the learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the Revenue and the learned counsel for the first respondent. Leaving alone for a moment the question whether the proceedings have to be affirmed as falling under section 16 or 55, the notice issued by the officer clearly states that the proceedings were issued under section 16. Only at the time of passing the order, apparently to get ove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Sales Corporation v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1996] 102 STC 106 (SC).. The first reassessment order itself came to be passed after the disposal of the writ petition and the Supreme Court decision. As such, on the second revision notice issued on January 18, 2001, the question of section 16(4) to exclude the time-limit does not arise at all. In the above circumstances, going by the facts herein, the Tribunal correctly came to the conclusion that the order passed could not be sustained as one within the time-frame given under section 16. In these circumstances, on the dates given, which are not disputed by the petitioner herein, we do not find any justification to apply the limitation to the proceedings impugned. Hence, the writ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
