STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. C DORAISAMY CHETTIAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue is in revision in the aforesaid tax cases against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore, remitting the appeals filed by the assesses to the assessing officer for fresh disposal in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made by the Tribunal in its order dated 31st March, 1981.

(2.) BRIEF facts relating to the filing of the appeals before the Tribunal need mention at this stage. The respondents in these tax revision cases are manufacturers-cum-dealers in gingelly oil and oil cakes. They had purchased gingelly seeds and oil cakes during the assessment years in question from unregistered dealers. The gingelly seeds had been consumed by the respondents-assessees in the manufacture of gingelly oil, and gingelly oil cakes had been dispatched to places outside the State otherwise than in the course of inter-State trade and commerce. The purchase of gingelly seeds had not suffered tax at any previous stage. The assessing authority assessed the dealers on the turnover involved relating to the gingelly seeds under section 7-A of the Tamil Nadu General Tax Act, 1959. The assessing authority had invoked the provisions of section 16 of the Act to bring the escaped turnover to assessment and passed the order. Apart from the respondents-assessees, the cases of a number of other assessees also were similarly treated by the assessing authority. These assessees as well as the assessees in some other cases preferred appeals before the appellate authority, viz., the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The appellate authority dealt with fourteen appeals by a common order dated 28th August, 1980. The pleas raised by the assessees before the appellate authority failed and the appeals were dismissed. For the limited purpose with which we are concerned in these revision cases, it is not necessary for us to deal with the pleas which were raised before the appellate authority by the assessees. The dismissal of the appeals by the common order by the appellate authority led the assessees including the respondents in the prescient four revision cases to file further appeals to the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, the case of the assessees was that in view of G.O.Ms. No. 1089 dated 29th June, 1977, the assessees were entitled to the waiver of tax liability for the period from 27th November, 1969 to 14th July, 1975. The Tribunal found on principle that the benefit of G.O.Ms. No. 1089 dated 29th June, 1977 would be available to the assessees, subject, however, to the assessees satisfying the conditions contained in the said Government Order, and since no investigation had been done by the assessing authority with regard to the facts whether or not the obligations contained in G.O.Ms. No. 1089 had been fulfilled by the assessees, the matter was remanded to the assessing authority for fresh disposal. It is as against this order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has come up in revision before this Court.

(3.) BEFORE the Tribunal, the assessees contended that they were entitled to the benefit contained in clause (3) of the recommendation, subject to the conditions and stipulation contained in G.O.Ms. No. 1089 supra. In the absence of any investigation into the factual aspects which would have entitled the assessees to the benefit of the waiver, the Tribunal rightly found that the matters required to be remanded to the assessing authority for fresh disposal. Undoubtedly, G.O.Ms. No. 1089 contained certain obligations which are to be fulfilled by an assessee in order to take advantage of clause (3) supra of the said Government Order. It is not the mere ipse dixit of an assessee that he is entitled to the benefit of that order which will entitle him to take advantage of the Government Order. The matters require a proper and thorough investigation in order to ascertain whether the assessments made under section 16 of the Act by the assessing authority come within the purview of G.O.Ms. No. 1089 dated 29th June, 1977. The Tribunal, therefore, rightly remanded the matters to the assessing authority for fresh disposal and we have not been persuaded to find any fault with the order of the Tribunal in the peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases.