Just a moment...

Top
Help
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

1999 (2) TMI 522

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er section 32 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (for short, "the Act") questioning the correctness of the assessment. The Deputy Commissioner dismissed the petition in limine. The assessee filed a writ petition challenging the said order in the High Court. The High Court held that the Deputy Commissioner should entertain the revision and decide it on its merits. The matter was thus remanded. 2.. After remand, the Deputy Commissioner once again dismissed the petition on merits. The assessee filed an appeal to the Tribunal which went into the merits and found that the assessee's contention was correct. Consequently, the appeal was allowed. The said judgment of the Tribunal was challenged by the appellant in revision under the Act....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on an application filed before him under section 32 within the period mentioned in the sub-section. Here the revision petition under section 32 was filed by the assessee within a period of four years and he passed an order on a later date. As the High Court has rightly pointed out, just because the Deputy Commissioner took time to pass the order on the application of the assessee, it cannot be said that the time-limit of four years prescribed by the section had expired and he had no jurisdiction to pass the order. We agree with the reasoning of the High Court and reject the first contention. 6.. As regards the second contention, the section itself contemplates a revision being filed when there was no appeal before the appellate authority.....