1996 (2) TMI 506

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... herein. Before the assessing officer, the assessee claimed exemption of Rs. 44,227.17 and Rs. 23,267.01, totalling to Rs. 67,494.18, since the sales were not fructified. 2.. The assessment year involved in this revision is 1976-77. The assessing officer found that out of the claim for Rs. 44,227.17, the claim for Rs. 24,713.79 is barred as it related to the assessment year 1975-76. Similarly i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ainst that order, the department is in revision before this Court. 3.. Learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) submitted that inasmuch as the assessee has not claimed exemption in the assessment year 1975-76, during which assessment year the goods were returned, the assessee cannot claim exemption in the subsequent year as per the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essment year, viz., in 1976-77. It is the contention of the department that the return of the tax can be claimed within six months from the date of return of the goods as per the decision of this Court on this aspect and the provisions contained in rule 5B of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959. But, the assessee submitted that the goods which were returned in the assessment year 1975-76 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rd of Revenue in its order, except stating that the assessee has to be blamed for the same. In any event, the Revenue is not entitled to get the tax collected twice on the same goods while the goods are exigible to tax on a single point. But we may make it clear that we are not basing our decision on this ground alone. We are satisfied that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the lig....