Entry tax assessment sustained where general administrative instructions did not vitiate quasi-judicial independence and exemption was unproved.

A revised entry tax assessment was sustained because the materials did not show that any superior authority issued a binding direction that displaced the assessing authority's independent quasi-judicial decision-making; a general clarification or instruction to revise assessments was insufficient to vitiate the order. The claimed exemption also failed because the petitioner did not prove, with positive evidence, that the vehicles entered Tamil Nadu before commencement of the Act. As the factual condition precedent for exemption was not established, the earlier provisional relief and refund could be revised and the levy upheld.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the revised assessment and levy of entry tax were vitiated by alleged interference or directions from a superior tax authority in the exercise of the assessing authority's quasi-judicial powers; (ii) Whether the petitioner proved that the vehicles entered Tamil Nadu before the Act came into force so as to attract the claimed exemption from entry tax.

Issue (i): Whether the revised assessment and levy of entry tax were vitiated by alleged interference or directions from a superior tax authority in the exercise of the assessing authority's quasi-judicial powers.

Analysis: The assessment under the Act was required to be made by the assessing authority in exercise of its own statutory powers. However, the materials did not show that the impugned order was made under any binding direction that displaced the authority's independent decision-making. The reference to a general clarification or instruction to revise assessments did not amount to direct interference in the particular assessment, nor did it establish that the order was passed behind the petitioner's back or without application of mind.

Conclusion: The challenge based on alleged superior interference failed, and the assessment was not invalid on that ground.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner proved that the vehicles entered Tamil Nadu before the Act came into force so as to attract the claimed exemption from entry tax.

Analysis: The petitioner's claim of prior entry was not substantiated by positive evidence. On verification of the records, the authority found that the two chassis had not entered the State before the commencement of the Act. Since the exemption depended on establishing entry prior to the commencement date, and that factual foundation was not proved, the earlier provisional relief and refund could validly be revised.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to the exemption, and the levy of entry tax was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed in its entirety, and the impugned levy and revised assessment were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A tax assessment is not invalid merely because a superior authority issues a general clarification or administrative instruction, and an exemption from entry tax must be proved by the assessee on the facts establishing entitlement to the statutory condition precedent.

---