2014 (8) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unt of a genuine misunderstanding between the parties. We have, by this order, sought to balance the equities and interests of both the parties by ensuring that the issue is decided on merits rather than by default. 4. Two assessment orders both dated 29.09.2007 were passed in respect of the petitioner under the Bombay Sales Tax Act (BST) as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act (CST) for the periods 01.01.2002 to 14.07.2002 and 15.07.2002 to 31.12.2002. The petitioner had made two applications both dated 05.12.2007 for setting aside assessment orders in Form N-30AA under Rule 36(1) - one in respect of the period of assessment 01.01.2002 to 14.07.2002 and the other in respect of the period of assessment 15.07.2002 to 31.12.2002. 5. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 33-D. Technically the applications for setting aside the assessment order passed under the CST Act ought to have been made in form VII(BB). What is important to note however, is that these applications stated that they were made for cancellation of the assessment order "as provided in section 33D of the Bombay Sales Act, 1959" and not that the applications were for cancellation only of the assessment orders under the BST Act. From the letter dated 10.01.2008, it in fact appears that the respondents themselves considered the applications dated 05.12.2007 to be under both the Acts. We are satisfied however, that the petitioners genuinely believed that the order dated 10.01.2008 was in respect of the assessments under both the Acts and th....