9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 809X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in the earlier assessment year. That decision of the Tribunal was confirmed by this Court in the year 2014. Without that decision having been reversed, there is no occasion to allow the matter to be agitated any further. Revision allowed. - Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. - 389 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 18-10-2019 - Saumitra Dayal Singh, J. For the Revisionist : Rahul Agarwal For the Opposite Party : C.S.C. ORDER SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH,J. 1. Present revision has been filed by the applicantassessee against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Agra, dated 23.12.2009, passed in seco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eupon revision has been admitted, read as under: i. Whether the learned Member Tribunal as well as the Joint Commissioner (Appeal) have committed a manifest error of law and facts in not following the Division Bench judgment of this Hon'ble Court in the case of Tarkeshwar Nath Agrawal Vs. C.S.T., 1975 UPTC 343, which is binding precedent and which clearly covers the controversy involved in the present case to the effect as to whether 'looking glass (mirror) is a 'toilet requisite' and liable to tax accordingly? ii. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case glass mirror imported and sold by the opposite party during the assessment year 2001-02 was 'toilet requisites' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion of this Court in The Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. Vs. Kohinoor Glass House, [(2009) 39 NTN 76] is erroneous. In any case, in that decision, the commodity involved was not glass and mirror sheets but mirror glass. 11. Learned counsel for the applicant-assesse has also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s Radasoami Satsang, Saomi Bagh, Agra Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1992) 1 SCC 659 . Paragraph no. 16 is relevant to note, which reads as below: 16. We are aware of the fact that strictly speaking res judicata does not apply to income tax proceedings. Again, each assessment year being a unit, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
