9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Tax) appearing on behalf of the respondent. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that, while an appeal is pending, under section 36 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, before the Tamil Nadu State Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, in S.T.A. No. 290 of 2008, it would not be open to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is aggrieved by only a part of such order, the Board of Revenue cannot exercise its revisional jurisdiction against the remaining part of that very order, of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner which is in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. . .". He had also relied on a decision of this court, in Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tiruchirapalli v. S. Gnanapatham reported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry part of that order has been the subject-matter of appeal. Such a contention is not justified by the wording of the section. The Tribunal was right in saying that the Deputy Commissioner interfered without jurisdiction. We dismiss this tax revision case." In such circumstances, the first respondent cannot invoke the special powers, under section 32 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been raised before the first respondent. Even otherwise no proceedings passed by the respondents can be held to be valid in the eye of law, if it is as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this petition and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, and in view of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
