TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (3) TMI 326
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he requisite recognition certificate issued under rule 25-B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Rules, 1957. By virtue of this certificate of recognition, the petitioner claimed that the turnover in question was not liable to be taxed during the period of the certificate. The assessing authority did not accept this contention of the petitioner. The alternative contention of the petitioner that under explanation I of the Fourth Schedule, the petitioner is entitled to set-off in respect of the tax paid on the purchase turnover of paddy was also negatived. The petitioner filed an appeal to the first appellate authority. The appellate authority did not accept the first contention and held that the petitioner had used electricity for converting paddy int....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....It provides for an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal by any person "objecting to an order" passed by the Assistant Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner under section 20, etc. The contention of the Revenue is that, when the first appellate authority gave a finding earlier, it gave rise to a cause of action to the assessee to object to the said order, but the assessee did not avail of the opportunity of filing an appeal under section 22 and if so, the earlier order of the appellate authority became final to that extent. Sri Indrakumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, contended that there is no such provision similar to section 105 of the Code of Civil Procedure enacted in the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. A superior cou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dered it at all merely on the ground that no appeal lay or no appeal was preferred? As was pointed out by the Privy Council in Moheshur Singh's case, 7 Moo Ind App 283, the effect of the rule that at every stage of the litigation a decision not appealed from must be held to be finally decided even in respect of the superior courts, will put on every litigant against whom an interlocutory order is decided, the burden of running to the higher courts for redress of the grievances, even though it may very well be that though the interlocutory order is against him, the final order will be in his favour and so it may not be necessary for him to go to the appeal court at all. Apart from the inevitable delay in the progress of the litigation that s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igation. The appeal before the Supreme Court is from the suit as a whole and, therefore, the entire subjectmatter is available for adjudication before us. If, on any other principle of finality statutorily conferred or on account of res judicata attracted by a decision in an allied litigation the matter is concluded, we too are bound in the Supreme Court. Otherwise, the whole lis for the first time comes to this Court and the High Court's finding at an intermediate stage does not prevent examination of the position of law by this Court. Intermediate stages of the litigation and orders passed at those stages have a provisional finality. After discussing various aspects of the matter, Chandrachud, J., speaking for the Court in Lonankutty AIR ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... A finding which affects only a portion of the data on which the order of assessment is based, has to be viewed as interlocutory in character. An assessment order cannot be split up into different portions is one of general application." A Full Bench of the Kerala High Court dealt with the question quite elaborately in Syed Alavi v. State of Kerala [1981] 48 STC 150. It was a case where the first appellate authority had remanded the matter after confirming the order of the assessing authority regarding the assessee's liability for assessment. It was held that the assessee was entitled to question the said finding at a subsequent stage before the higher appellate authority after the assessing authority made an order afresh. Technical r....