1990 (7) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....du Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Madurai, in M.T.A. No. 29 of 1984 dated November 28, 1984, has filed this revision petition. 2.. The Tribunal, by order under revision, has set aside the penalty levied by the assessing officer under section 22(2) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and confirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. 3.. Briefly, the facts are, that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... similar assessment in respect of the same decorticating mill owners on the ground that there was no privity of contract between the agriculturists, principals and buyers. I have followed the then decisions which were holding the field and hence the appellants are liable to pay the tax on the purchase value of groundnut kernel. But subsequent to my order on these appeal petition for the previous y....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w that the department was also under the impression that the assessee was liable to pay tax on the purchase of groundnut. In the circumstances, it cannot be said that the respondents alone are responsible for the mistake. The mistake is on the part of the Revenue also. In State of Tamil Nadu v. Sasman and Company reported in [1984] 57 STC 160, this Court has observed that "when the assessing autho....