TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (3) TMI 571
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Trade Tax, Ghaziabad (respondent No. 3) for the assessment year 2000-01, by which in exercise of power under section 21(2) of the Trade Tax Act, permission for reassessment was granted and accordingly, the assessing authority has issued the notice for reassessment. The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of loudspeaker parts, namely, paper cone, dust cap and spider. For the assessment year 2000-01, the petitioner was assessed and the aforesaid components were treated as electronic components. Accordingly, trade tax was assessed at four per cent. Thereafter, the proceeding for reassessment was started on the ground that the parts manufactured and sold by the petitioner are liable to be assessed under the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted March 9, 2007 rejected the objection of the petitioner and granted permission under section 21(2) of the Trade Tax Act for reassessment. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the notice was issued by the assessing officer (respondent No. 3) on March 14, 2007. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parts manufactured and sold by the petitioner were finally held by the appellate authority as the components of electrical goods coming in the head of "electronic goods". The judgment of the appellate authority inter se is binding and it is not proper for the assessing authority to overreach the judgment and restart the reassessment proceeding in respect of the same goods. Accordingly, the permission as granted under section 21(2) a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng to tax for different assessment years because res judicata applies to debar courts from entertaining issues on the same cause of action whereas the cause of action for each assessment year is distinct. The courts will generally adopt an earlier pronouncement of the law or a conclusion of fact unless there is a new ground urged or a material change in the factual position. The reason why courts have held parties to the opinion expressed in a decision in one assessment year to the same opinion in a subsequent year is not because of any principle of res judicata but because of the theory of precedent or the precedential value of the earlier pronouncement. Where facts and law in a subsequent assessment year are the same, no authority whether....