1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>High Court upholds Sales Tax Commissioner's revision powers in manganese ore assessment case</h1> The High Court of Madhya Pradesh affirmed the Sales Tax Commissioner's jurisdiction to revise the order under section 22-B of the Act in a case involving ... - Issues:1. Jurisdiction of Sales Tax Commissioner to revise order under section 22-B of the Act.2. Validity of initiating proceedings under section 22-B based on a notice.Jurisdiction of Sales Tax Commissioner to revise order under section 22-B of the Act:The case involved the assessment of sales tax on a dealer for manganese ore transactions. The Sales Tax Officer initially found the dealer not liable for tax as the ore was exported. However, the Sales Tax Commissioner, using revisional powers under section 22-B, set aside the order for fresh assessment. The dealer contended that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to revise the order and that it was a case of escaped assessment under section 11-A. The court held that if the Sales Tax Officer's assessment was based on existing information and not new facts, revision under section 22-B was permissible. The court cited previous decisions to support that a mere change of opinion does not invoke section 11-A, allowing the Commissioner to exercise revisional powers.Validity of initiating proceedings under section 22-B based on a notice:The second issue involved the validity of initiating proceedings under section 22-B based on a notice issued to the dealer. The notice informed the dealer of the intention to reassess certain transactions for potential tax liability. The dealer argued that the notice did not comply with the requirements of section 22-B. The court disagreed, stating that the notice provided sufficient information about the proposed reassessment, giving the dealer an opportunity to be heard. The court emphasized that the notice need not specify the exact taxable turnover beforehand, as it would depend on the outcome of the reassessment. The court found the notice adequate and upheld the validity of initiating proceedings under section 22-B based on the notice.In conclusion, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh affirmed that the Sales Tax Commissioner had jurisdiction to revise the order under section 22-B and that the notice issued for initiating proceedings under section 22-B was valid. The court answered both questions in the affirmative, holding the dealer liable for costs and fixing the counsel's fee.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
