BIOLOGICAL E LIMITED Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE are unable to agree with the learned counsel that the Tribunal has no power to dismiss the appeal as infructuous. By the time the appeal against the provisional assessment order was taken up by the Tribunal, the final assessment order had been passed. Thus, the provisional order of assessment became no longer enforceable inasmuch as it merged into the final assessment order. It is not in dispute that appeal against the final assessment has already been filed and the same is pending before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner. In the circumstances, the course adopted by the Tribunal in not going into the merits of the issues raised in the appeal and dismissing it on the ground that it has become infructuous cannot be faulted. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the Tribunal is not contemplated by section 21 (4) of the APGST Act, 1957 cannot be accepted. Passing of such order as may be deemed fit encompasses within its scope the order of the nature passed by the Tribunal in the instant case. The decision in [1970] 25 STC 425 (AP) (Oversea Mica Exports v. Secretary, Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal) relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner has no application to a situation of this nature. Hence the T. R. C. is dismissed at the admission stage. However, we direct that the first appeal pending before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner shall be disposed of within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order.