TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (7) TMI 878
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he provisions of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act,1959, (TNGST Act) and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (CST Act). The orders impugned in these Writ Petitions are assessment orders for the assessment years 2001-02 & 2002-03, which are revision of assessment under Section 16 of TNGST Act. 3. The petitioner was served with notices dated 07.06.2004 and 07.06.2004 respectively for both the assessment years and they submitted their objections dated 13.09.2004. After considering the objections, the respondent has passed the impugned orders, this Court need not labour much to go into the aspects as the Court had occasioned to consider the correctness of the assessment for the year 2003-04 in respect of the petitioner's dealer in W.P.No.14851 of 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t assessment year. The Court after taking into consideration the earlier orders passed, allowed the Writ Petition issuing certain directions. 5. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent in both the Writ Petitions which are more or less identical, the respondent has stated that the petitioner has to avail the alternate remedy of filing an appeal as against the impugned assessment orders and in this regard referred to the orders passed by the Division Bench. So far as the availment of the alternate remedy provided under the statue, it is not an universal rule that in all cases, the aggrieved parties have to be relegated to avail the alternate remedy and the Courts have carved out exceptional circumstances where the High Court can exe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner set aside the assessment. But on appeal, the Sales Tax Tribunal upheld the assessment. While doing so, the Tribunal relied upon the statements of certain persons to support its conclusion. Challenging the order of the Tribunal, the assessee approached the Allahabad High Court, which dismissed the petition on the ground that there is no substantial question of law. 32. Again challenging the same, the assessee filed a special leave petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, contending that the Tribunal was not correct in relying upon the statements of third parties, which have been recorded behind the back of the assessee, as the assessee has no occasion to test those statements by cross examination. Accepting the case of the dea....