9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Bench) dated January 6, 1999 made in T.A.No. 747 of 1994. The petitioner was originally assessed on a total and taxable turnover of Rs. 21,25,282.59. Subsequently based on the result of the inspection conducted on July 10, 1992 by the enforcement wing officers, the revision of assessment was made under section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 and the taxable turnover was re-fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... July 28, 1992 by accepting the form F and other records allowed the claim of exemption made under section 6A of the CST Act, 1956? Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. The said question of law has been answered by the apex court in the case of Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in [2004] 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessing authority or to have a relook at the matter would not confer any jurisdiction upon him to get the proceedings reopened. Discovery of new material, although it may form a ground, by itself may not be a ground for reopening the proceedings unless by reason of such discovery it turns out that a jurisdictional error had been committed. In this case, there is no finding recorded by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
