9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 909X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of the assessment order dated 24.03.2011 would indicate that the version of the revisionist has been considered by the assessing authority and he has observed that he himself has examined the bill book upon being produced by the revisionist but the bill book is not having the original bill contained in the bill book. Thus, the said ground is rejected. Incidentally, this finding of the bill book having been examined by the Authority has not been denied anywhere by the revisionist upon filing of either the first appeal or the second appeal. The learned Tribunal has erroneously observed in the judgment dated 14.12.2012 that sale took place with respect to bill no. 107 dated 01.01.2008 and bill no.121 dated 30.01.2008 of which all three copi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parties that the matter in issue in both the revisions is common, as such, both the revisions are being decided by a common order. For convenience, the facts of Sales/Trade Tax Revision No.64 of 2013 have been taken into consideration. 3. Despite an interim order having been granted by this Court vide order dated 01.03.2013 which was subsequently not extended vide order dated 25.01.2024 the revision has still not been admitted. 4. Instant revision has been filed challenging the order dated 14.12.2012, a copy of which is Annexure-1 to the revision, passed by the learned Tribunal by which second appeal filed by the revisionist has been dismissed. 5. The contention of learned counsel for the revisionist is that initially an assessment order d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of hearing has been accorded to the revisionist at any stage by the authorities. 8. So far as the first ground is concerned namely that the revisionist was having three copies of the bills in his bill book which has not been appreciated by the competent authority, a perusal of the assessment order dated 24.03.2011 would indicate that the version of the revisionist has been considered by the assessing authority and he has observed that he himself has examined the bill book upon being produced by the revisionist but the bill book is not having the original bill contained in the bill book. Thus, the said ground is rejected. Incidentally, this finding of the bill book having been examined by the Authority has not been denied anywhere by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
