High CourtsDivision Bench(1990) 08 BOM CK 0003

Rajur Lime Stores vs State of Maharashtra

Bombay High Court · Decided on 6 August 1990

HON’BLE JUDGES
V.A. Mohta, J · H.D. Patel, J
CASE NUMBER
Sales Tax Reference Application No. 2 of 1980

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 307 words

V.A. Mohta, J.—This is an application u/s 61(1) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The basic factual background is this :

Vide order dated October 13, 1965, the Sales Tax Officer levied sales tax on the assessee holding that his imports during the year 1961 exceeded the prescribed limit of Rs. 2,500 and the sales exceeded the prescribed limit of Rs. 10,000. This order was set aside in first appeal by the Assistant Commissioner who by a direction dated March 26, 1966, ordering fresh inquiry into the matter. In the second appeal the order of remand for fresh inquiry was set aside by the Tribunal vide its order dated July 13, 1967.

2.

In the meanwhile the Sales Tax Officer had started fresh inquiry as directed by the first appellate authority. He started collecting material since May, 1966. On the basis of the material so obtained as per direction of the first appellate authority, show cause notice was issued and fresh assessment order passed vide order dated September 27, 1967. The said order was confirmed in the first appeal by the Assistant Commissioner and in the second appeal by the Tribunal. The assessee applied for reference u/s 61(1) of the Sales Tax Act. The said application for reference was dismissed and aggrieved thereby, application under the proviso to section 61(1) of the Act has been made to this Court.

3.

Basic issue in the case is whether there could be a fresh order of assessment on the basis of the remand order which was later on set aside. Having regard to the whole background, it cannot be said that the question is inarguable. Hence we set aside the order passed by the Tribunal and direct the Tribunal to refer to this Court appropriate question along with statement of facts. Order accordingly. No costs.

4.

Application allowed.