TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (9) TMI 605
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1989-90 has filed these appeals under section 24 of the Act against the revisional order. The facts occasioning this appeal briefly stated are: 2.. Appellant herein is engaged in the execution of job-work of printing and supplying of printed materials according to specific orders placed by the various customers. In relation to the period 1986-87, the proceedings were taken up under section 12-A of the Act for reassessment to tax a sum of Rs. 1,47,740 as representing sales of printed materials which had escaped levy of tax in the original assessment as completed. Also, in relation to the period 1989-90, reassessment proceedings were taken up and the assessing authority sought to levy tax in respect of amounts realised by the appel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the market for sale as those were specifically meant for particular persons for whose sake the work was undertaken. It was also contended that the execution of job-work undertaken by the appellant was governed by section 5-B of the Act and the question had to be determined with reference to the said provision alone. First appellate authority passed a common appellate order dated September 23, 1992 a copy of which has been attached as annexure C. It was held that the appellant had undertaken the job-work of printing and supplying of the materials at the behest of various companies and persons against specific orders and such materials have no independent commercial value and as such, the appellant's execution of the jobwork squarely falls....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was not exigible to levy of tax under section 5-B of the Act earlier to April 1, 1992. The entire receipts realised by the appellants were held to be entitled to exemption from levy of sales tax. The order, annexure C, was ordered to be rectified in respect of periods 1986-87 and 1989-90. 6.. Subsequently, the revisional authority initiated proceedings under section 22-A of the Act seeking to set aside the common appellate order dated September 23, 1992 (annexure C) passed by the first appellate authority in the appellant's case and to restore the reassessment order and the assessment orders relating to the periods 1986-87 and 1989-90 respectively. It did not take notice of the order of rectification passed by the first appellate author....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sional proceedings and the first appellate authority had rightly held that appellant is liable to be dealt with under section 5-B of the Act. Revisional authority however overruled the objections filed by the appellant and passed the common revisional order, annexure H, setting aside the common appellate order dated September 23, 1992, annexure C, passed by the first appellate authority and restored the reassessment order and the assessment order. Revisional authority did not take notice of the order of rectification, annexure E, passed by the first appellate authority. Appellant under a mistaken belief that the appeal was maintainable against the order passed by the revisional authority filed two appeals before the Karnataka Appellate Trib....