1962 (4) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ntral Sales Tax Act. This contention of the assessee was negatived by the assessing authority, the Sales Tax Officer, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in appeal, and by the Tribunal in further appeal. The ground for negativing the contention was that the several declaration forms mentioned in the order of assessment of the Sales Tax Officer relating to the disputed turnover of Rs. 82,358-39 nP. were not in conformity with the proviso to subrule (1) of rule 11 of the Central Sales Tax (Kerala) Rules, 1957, as each of these forms represented a turnover of over Rs. 5.000 and took in more than one transaction of sale. Rule 11 (1) reads: "11. (1) A registered dealer. who wishes to purchase goods from another such dealer on payment of tax ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e specifically requested the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to grant him 15 days' time to produce new declaration forms in accordance with the proviso to sub-rule (1) of rule 11. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected this request and said: "The contention is not acceptable". This request for an opportunity to produce new C Forms was repeated before the Sales Tax, Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal said: "If they had requested for time and the Sales Tax Officer had rejected their request the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ought to have allowed the appellants an opportunity to produce revised declaration forms. But that question does not arise as the appellant did not ask for any time to the Sales Tax Officer. The request was ....