9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... side, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner who is a registered dealer on the file of the second respondent under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 [TNGST Act], has filed this Writ Petition, challenging the order of passed by the first respondent, Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes-III, exercising his power of suo motu revision under section 34 of the TNGST Act, against the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT), Trichy, dated 24.09.1997. 3. Before this Court examine the facts of the case, it would be relevant to take note of the powers conferred on the Appellate Authority and the powers conferred on the Revisional Authority who has exercised the power of suo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or annul the assessment or the penalty or both; set aside the assessment and direct the assessing authority to make a fresh assessment after such further inquiry as may be directed; or pass such other orders as he may think it fit; or in the case of any other, confirm, cancel or vary such order of assessment. 4. Thus, the Statute gives very wide powers to the Appellate Authority in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 31 of the TNGST Act. This is because, the Appellate Proceedings are continuation of the assessment proceedings. The Appellate Authority can revise and re-write the order of assessment and whatever discretion which has been conferred on the Assessing Officer as well. The said view is supported by the decision of the Hon& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 30.04.1997, as against which, the petitioner preferred an Appeal before the Appellate Authority in Appeal No.641 of 1997. The Appellate Authority by an elaborate order, taking into consideration of all the aspects, found that the case as projected by the petitioner was acceptable and accordingly, allowed the Appeal. By way of implementing the order of the Appellate Authority, the consequential order was passed by the Assessing Officer on 30.04.1997. After about one year, the Joint Commissioner, initiated suo motu revision proceedings. 7. From the para-wise instructions, it is seen that such notice was issued on 30.04.1998 and thereafter four notices were issued, the last of which was on 04.02.2003. This explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hile exercising the power under section 34 of the Act. 9. The report submitted by the Inspecting Officer in the opinion of this Court can be treated as first information report, based on which, action could be initiated by issuing notice. As this was not done, it resulted in an order of dismissal, which has been set aside by the Appellate Authority by an order dated 24.09.1997. The Appellate Authority's order is a well reasoned order, which dealt with each of the items. Therefore, the Revisional Authority cannot contend that what was stated by the Dealer before the Inspecting Officer was different and he cannot for that reason reject or interfere with the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Revisional Authority sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
