1988 (6) TMI 310

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n cases can be disposed of by a common order. For the sake of convenience, we may state the facts in T.R.C. No. 43 of 1985 since all the material facts are identical, though the dates of orders may vary from case to case.   The assessment year concerned is 1972-73. The original assessment was made on 19th September, 1973. The turnover relating to jaggery was taxed but at a lower rate. The ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de in this case beyond four year period (though within six years), it was contended, the order of assessment is barred by limitation. This contention was entertained by this Court on that occasion. But it was observed: "Inasmuch as the adjudication depends upon the material in each case, it is essentially a matter involving facts, it is but appropriate to remit these 12 T.R.Cs. back to the Appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... providing for a uniform four year period of limitation to be calculated from the date of service of the order of assessment, the reassessment order in these T.R.Cs.at any rate in T.R.C. Nos. 43 and 52 of 1985-is barred by limitation. It is contended that whereas formerly sub-section (4-A) calculated the period of four years or six years, as the case may be, from the date of the expiry of the r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion then urged was that it is the four year period that applies and not the six year period. The remand therefore, must accordingly be construed as confined to that question. In any event, even before the Tribunal, the only contention urged was that the four year period applied and not the six year period on the facts of the case. This the Tribunal discussed and on merits found that it is the s....