STATE OF ANDHRA Vs. A SRIRAMULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question in this case turns upon the interpretation of Section 12-A (6) (a) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. A Division Bench of this court held in Chandaji Kubaji & Co. v. State of Andhra that, under that (1) 1956 A.L.T, 446 = 69 L.W.( Andhra) 43. ' section a review could be ordered only if new facts not placed before the Tribunal on the previous occasion were brought to their notice subsequently but it . would not apply to a case where new evidence was sought to be adduced to support basic facts already placed before the Tribunal. As the question now raised is important from the stand-point of assessees under the Act in this State, we think in the interest of finality, an authoritative decision on the interpretation of the section should be given by a Full Bench of this Court. We therefore, refer the following question to the Full Bench.

(2.) He also allowed the application for review so far as it related to the sum of Rs. 65,623-13-0 was concerned. In the result, the view of the majority prevailed and the sum of Rs. 65,623-13-0 was deleted from the turnover. The State of Andhra preferred a revision petition to the High Court against the order of the Appellate Tribunal on the ground that, in the absence of a finding that any new pleas or new facts were brought to the notice of the Tribunal, the application for review was not maintainable and that the mandatory provisions of Section 12-A (6) require that a review could be allowed only on the basis of facts which were not before the Tribunal at the time of the original order.

(3.) The objection was also raised that apart from Section 12-A (6) the Tribunal had no inherent jurisdiction to review its own order. The division bench before which the revision case came on for hearing considered it desirable that the proper interpretation of section 12-A (6) (a) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act should be decided by a Full Bench and referred the following general question: