9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (8) TMI 1118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, we are not in a position to interfere with the said findings in the absence of any other valid material displayed by the Revenue which was omitted to be considered by the lower appellate authorities. In the absence of any question of law, the orders impugned cannot be revised under section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. Revision dismissed. - T.C. (R) No. 2361 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 20-8-2009 - IBRAHIM KALIFULLA F.M. AND BANUMATHI R., JJ. ORDER:- The order of the court was made by F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA J. The Revenue has come forward with this revision, challenging the order dated April 10, 2003. passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore in CTSA No. 1/ 2001. The Tribunal af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, the assessing authority assessed the tax liability and also imposed penalty at 150 per cent of the tax liability. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that once the acknowledgement by the representative of the consignors was available on record in proof of having taken back the goods, that cannot be a sale as contemplated under section 3 of the Central Sales Tax Act. Therefore, if the respondent/assessee is still to be held liable, the burden was solely on the revenue to establish the factum of sale involved. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner has set aside the order passed by the assessing authorities. The Tribunal, when affirming the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, held in paragraph 4 of its order was follow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturned due to the poor quality the respondent has obtained signature from the representative of the consignor who accompanied the goods which is available in the assessment file. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement) Dharmapuri, has enquired the respondent on December 17, 1995 and the respondent had categorically stated that items referred from 1, 2, 3 do not relate to them and the balance 9 items were returned back due to poor quality. Relying on [1994] 95 STC 333 (Mad), in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. S.P. Meyyammai Achi, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has allowed the appeal stating that the Revenue has not let in any evidence that the respondent had taken delivery of the goods and sold them without bringing them in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent-assessee based on the relevant documents found in the assessment file. With reference to those documents when such a categoric finding came to be recorded by the Tribunal, we are not in a position to interfere with the said findings in the absence of any other valid material displayed by the Revenue which was omitted to be considered by the lower appellate authorities. Therefore, in the absence of any illegality pointed out in the approach of either the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or the Tribunal, while appreciating the disputed questions of fact, we are not inclined to interfere with the findings of the lower appellate authorities. In the absence of any question of law, the orders impugned cannot be revised under section 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
