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 pre-revision notice proposing to classify the product as confectionary and revise the completed assessment was jurisdiction in view of the existing statutory clarifications and prior assessment.
Analysis: The product had already been the subject of statutory clarifications issued under section 28A of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, treating it as an ayurvedic medicine taxable at four per cent. The same position had been adopted in the earlier assessment, and excess collection above four per cent had been appropriated as penalty under section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The later notice relied on an earlier contrary clarification and on a change of view, without showing any new material, change in law, or withdrawal of the favourable clarifications. In these circumstances, the notice was contrary to the binding departmental clarifications and amounted only to a change of opinion.
Conclusion: The impugned notice was held to be without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside, and the relief sought by the petitioner was granted.
Ratio Decidendi: A completed assessment cannot be reopened by a later quasi-judicial authority on the same facts merely by taking a different view when binding statutory clarifications in force support the earlier classification.