Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the revised assessment made under section 16(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 could be sustained when the assessee produced the original form F declarations before the first appellate authority and the assessing authority's verification report confirmed them to be in order.
Analysis: The revised assessment was made on the premise that only duplicate form F declarations had been produced before the assessing authority. However, the original declarations were later produced before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and the assessing authority himself verified them and reported that the originals tallied with the duplicates and were found in order. The appellate authority and the Tribunal concurrently accepted this material and set aside the revised assessment. In the absence of any error in those concurrent factual findings, no ground was made out for writ interference.
Conclusion: The revised assessment was not sustained and interference with the concurrent orders was declined in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The writ challenge to the appellate and tribunal orders failed, and the assessee's relief against the revised assessment stood confirmed.
Ratio Decidendi: Concurrent findings of fact, especially those supported by the assessing authority's own verification report, will not ordinarily be disturbed in writ jurisdiction absent a clear error or perversity.