Skip to content


Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tiruchirapalli Vs. Sri Venkateswaran Dyeing Factory - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberT.C. No. 858 of 1980 (Revision No. 514 of 1980)
Judge
Reported in[1983]54STC120(Mad)
ActsTamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 - Sections 16
AppellantDeputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tiruchirapalli
RespondentSri Venkateswaran Dyeing Factory
Advocates:Additional Government Pleader
Excerpt:
- .....purchased yarn from master weavers who in turn have purchased from co-operative societies which in turn had purchased from the spinning mills. it is in that context the tribunal observed that when the yarn has been traced to production from the spinning mills in the state and had been sold to co-operative societies in the state, it is difficult to hold that there were no earlier taxable sales in the state and that the respondent herein who had come into possession of the goods after two or three stages had become the first seller in the state, and that there was no sufficient material for the assessing officer to make the assessment under section 16 in respect of an escaped turnover. by making these observations and reaching this conclusion, the tribunal cannot be said to have committed.....
Judgment:

Ismail, C.J.

1. The matter relates to reassessment under section 16 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. There is no dispute that the respondent had purchased yarn from master weavers who in turn have purchased from co-operative societies which in turn had purchased from the spinning mills. It is in that context the Tribunal observed that when the yarn has been traced to production from the spinning mills in the State and had been sold to co-operative societies in the State, it is difficult to hold that there were no earlier taxable sales in the State and that the respondent herein who had come into possession of the goods after two or three stages had become the first seller in the State, and that there was no sufficient material for the assessing officer to make the assessment under section 16 in respect of an escaped turnover. By making these observations and reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal cannot be said to have committed any error of law so as to entitle this Court to interfere in revision. The tax revision case is therefore dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //