TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (3) TMI 684
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioner has filed this original petition to call for the records in the proceedings No. 001050/ 94-95/A4 dated August 23, 2002 on the file of the first respondent, directing the respondent to refund the sales tax, surcharge, additional sales tax and additional surcharge collected as per assessment order dated September 20, 1999 assessment year 1994-95. 2. The petitioner is an assessee on the file....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of imported sugar cannot be subjected to tax. Accordingly, the petitioner wrote to the first respondent who replied in his letter dated August 23, 2002 that the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had been given effect to and since the assessment for the year 199495 had become final, the request for refund could not be complied with. Hence the original petition. 3.. Learned Couns....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lected can be refunded on the basis of the judgment passed at a later stage in the case of a different assessee, their Lordships of the Supreme Court in a Constitution Bench, in the case of Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [1998] 111 STC 467 while deciding the provisions of excise duty, have held: "Ordinarily, no assessee can be allowed to reopen proceedings that have been finally concl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ould be bound by the earlier judgment which had attained finality. A mere subsequent change in law does not give a fresh cause of action to a petitioner whose lis has attained finality, and indeed such finality had been attained way back on September 3, 1996 itself." In view of these two decisions, it is clear that the order passed in the case of some other assessees in W.P.Nos. 10128 and 10129 o....