S KANNAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the order of the Board of Revenue dated 4th February, 1975, for the assessment year 1971-72 in a suo motu revision of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.

(2.) THE assessee returned a total turnover of Rs. 17, 308. 17 for the assessment year 1971-72. THE assessing officer rejected the amount as incorrect and incomplete and determined the total and taxable turnover to the best of his judgment at Rs. 72, 090. 80 under section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Tiruchirapalli, while upholding the rejection of the accounts, determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 34, 617 and deleted the balance. He further directed this turnover to be assessed under the provisions of section 7.

(3.) SECTION 7 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 provides for payment of tax at compounded rates. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 3, every dealer, whose turnover was not less than the minimum turnover assessable but not more than the maximum provided in the section from time to time, may, at his option instead of paying the tax in accordance with the provisions of section 3(1), pay tax at certain graded rates depending on the volume of the turnover. SECTION 7(2) provided that any dealer who estimated his turnover for a year to be not more than the maximum amount provided in the section from time to time with reference to that particular year may apply to the assessing authority to be permitted to pay the tax under this section and, on being so permitted, he should pay the tax due in advance during the year in monthly or prescribed instalments and for that purpose he would have to submit the returns in the prescribed manner. SECTION 7(2-A), which was brought into force retrospectively so as to cover this year also, provided that the permission grated by the assessing officer under sub-section (2) should continue in force so long as the dealer is eligible to be assessed under the section and has not withdrawn his option to be so assessed.As far as this case is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the assessee had been given the benefit of section 7 in the prior year and, in view of sub-section (2-A), this benefit would ensure for the subsequent year also until the assessee withdraws his option to be assessed.