9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2002 and the assessment could be framed up to April 30, 2005. It is not disputed that the assessing authority framed the assessment on April 9, 2007 which was beyond the period of limitation. Once that was so, the assessment order was void and without jurisdiction. The recourse to revisional proceedings by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner after the expiry of more than five years which were initiated on September 8, 2008 was, thus, bad. The decision of the Tribunal is in consonance with the provisions of the statute. The learned counsel for the petitioners was unable to pin point any error or perversity in the order impugned herein which may warrant interference by this court. No substantial question of law arises in these revisions, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xure P2), during the revisional proceedings taken under section 21 of the PGST Act for the purpose of correcting the impropriety of the assessment order in so far as the levy of CST at two per cent on the inter-State sales made by the respondent to the Government Department against D forms and not against C forms? (iv) Whether the respondents were entitled to avail of the reduced CST at two per cent on the sale of yarn, which was made by them against D forms to Government Departments by taking recourse to notification dated July 13, 2001 in which the said concession was available only if declaration in form C were submitted as specified in the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957 at the time of assessment? Put sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 21 of the CST Act at the rate of four per cent in respect of the sale made by the assessee against D form instead of at two per cent and passed the revised assessment order dated November 23, 2009 raising a demand of ₹ 2,46,338. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee preferred revision before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated July 16, 2010 set aside the order dated November 23, 2009 holding that the original assessment order was time-barred. According to the Tribunal, the assessment should have been framed within three years, i.e., on or before April 30, 2005, as the last date for filing the return for the relevant assessment year 2001-02 was April 30, 2002 whereas the assessment had been framed on April 9, 2007. Hence, the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
