A NARAYANA Vs. STATE OF MADRAS
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
STATE OF MADRAS
Click here to view full judgement.
K.SUBBA RAO, J. -
(1.)This is a revision against the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra, dismissing the application filed by the assessee under Sec. 12-A (6) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act for reviewing the order passed by the Tribunal in T. A. No. 702 of 1952.
(2.)The petitioners were assessed to tax on a turnover of Rs. 28,69,151-6-10 for the year 1948-49 by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Guntur. After filing an unsuccessful appeal to the Commercial Tax Officer, Guntur they preferred an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Before the Tribunal, it was, inter alia, contended that, out of the total turnover, a sum of Rs. 10,45,156-4-9 related to the commission purchase of commodities taxable at the stage of sale under the Act on behalf of principals resident outside the State. But they neither placed before the Tribunal any material in support of that contention nor advanced any arguments in support of it. The Tribunal, therefore, rejected that contention. In the petition filed under Section 12-A(6) before the Tribunal, the assesses contended that, as the accounts of the petitioners were maintained in Gujarati language and as there was none on behalf of the petitioners who could give instructions to their Advocate either in Telugu or in English when the appeal was heard, they could not place the necessary material before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the application with the following remarks:
"It is a cardinal rule of procedure that each side should be ready on the day of hearing with all the facts and materials and parties cannot ask the court to reopen a decision by tendering evidence which they ought to have done at the proper time but defaulted to do so. It is quite a different matter if any new facts come to light later and the review is sought for on that account. But where the materials ought to be in the possession of a party but not produced at the time of hearing nor was an adjournment sought for to that end, the case cannot be brought under Section 12 A (6)."
(3.)Learned Counsel for the assesses contended before us that the provisions of Section 12-A (6) are very wide and comprehensive and that he would be entitled to review in the circumstances of the present case. Section 12-A (6) (a) reads:
"The appellate Tribunal may, on the application either of the assesses or of the Deputy Commissioner, review any order passed by it under sub section (4) on the basis of facts which were before it when it passed the order."
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.