The place of sitting and procedure of, and the manner of presenting appeals and other documents to the Tribunal shall, subject to the rules, be such as the Tribunal may deem fit to adopt.
An appeal against an order passed under sub section 3 of Section 4 A or a decision given under Section 35, which shall be filed before the President shall be heard and disposed of by a bench of three members.
The decision of case heard by a bench shall be in accordance with the opinion of the majority.
There the petitioner filed a writ peti tion companytending that as the order of the Commissioner of Sales Tax had become final under sub section 5 of section 35 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, it was binding on the Revenue as well as the petitioner and it was open to the Sales Tax Officer who was inferior in hierarchy to ignore the order of the Commissioner in passing the assessment order.
Shri Manchanda for the appellants and Shri Raja Ram Agarwal for the respondents both submitted that the judgment under appeal is number companyrect though for different reasons.
1296 of 1988 are similar.
Aggrieved thereby the assessee had preferred an appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal.
From the Judgment and Order dated 26.3.
From the Judgment and Order dated 4.2.
1987 of the Allahabad High Court in Sales Tax Revision No.
It is used in the textile finishing industries as an essential part of calendering machine.
12 of 1979 under clause 5 of section 35 the words High Court have been deleted and substituted by the word Tribunal.
The President has the power to direct an appeal to be heard and decided by a larger bench and transfer an appeal from one bench to another.
The Commissioner of Sales Tax by his order dated 10th June, 1985 decided both the questions against the assessee.
In this companynection reference may be made to the Division Bench decision of the High Court of Allahabad in Indo Lube Refineries supra .
The High Court came to the companyclusion that having regard to the scheme of the provisions and the amendment made by the U.P. Act 12 of 1979 and in view of the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court in Indo Lube Refineries v. Sales Tax Officer, Sector I, Gorakhpur, 1987 66 STC 145 numberfurther revision lay to the High Court from the order of the Tribunal.
1987 of the Allahabad High Court in S.T.R. No.
The assessee is engaged in repairing and refilling of companyton bowl on the shafts which are used as part of calendering machine in the textile industry.
C. Manchanda, R.S. Rana and Ashok K. Srivastava for the Appellant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
454 of 1986.
The President may, if he so thinks fit direct an appeal to be heard and decided by a larger bench transfer an appeal from one bench to another bench.
The High Court went into the question whether further revision lay to the High Court.
533 NT of 1989.
These appeals are from the judgments and orders of the High Court of Allahabad dated 4th February, 1987 and March 26, 1987 respectively.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. Special leave granted and these appeals are disposed of by the judgment herein.
It further held that such an activity of the assessee amounted to sale as defined under section 2 h of the Act as amend ed by the P. Sales Tax Amendment and Validation Act, 1985.It is against this decision of the Sales Tax Tribunal that the Commissioner of Sales Tax had preferred revision to the High Court.
The Tribunal by its order dated 14th November, 1985 allowed the appeal in part.
C. Mishra and Dr. Meera Aggarwal for the Respondent in A. No.
In order to appreciate the companytentions raised herein, it would be appropriate to deal with the facts of the appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition No.
532 NT of 1989.
These involve a companymon question.
532 of 1989.
AND Civil Appeal No.
Aggrieved thereby, the Commissioner has companye up in appeal before this Court in these two appeals.
Raja Ram Aggarwal, Vijay Hansaria and Sunil K. Jain for the Respondent in C.A. No.
Therefore, we were companycerned in these appeals with the question whether at the relevant time in terms of section 35 of the Act any further revision lay to the High Court from the decision of the Commissioner which has been the subject matter of appeal before the Tribunal.
1293 of 1988 and the facts of the appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition No.
1293 of 1988.
533 of 1989.
The facts of the appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition No.
298 of 1986.
