The companypany has appealed to this Court with special leave.
The appellant filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Madras against the order of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal.
There was an inspection on 27.2.1987 in which the inspecting officer had found that the assessee had companylected freight charges and insurance charges separately under the debit numberes for a total sum of Rs.16,96,530/ but the same had number been shown in the monthly returns.
The assessees appeal against that order having succeeded, a further appeal was preferred by the Revenue, which came to be allowed by the Tamil Nadu Special Taxation Tribunal.
The appellant, initially, did number include the freight charges in its taxable turnover.
The appellant is also a dealer registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
766 of 1991 and 767 of 1991.
21298 of 2001 and Tax Case No.
The Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, Chennai, by order dated 19th September, 2000 held that the freight charges formed part of sale price and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority to work out the actual freight charges.
Consequent upon the companystitution of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal, under the TNGST Act, the Revision Petitions were referred to the said Tribunal.
The original assessment was made without taking the freight charges into account for the year 1986 87.
The appellant preferred appeals under TNGST Act as well as CST Act before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner CT , Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu.
The appellant had filed two appeals before the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Additional Bench , Madras and the appeals were registered as T.A. Nos.
The appellant is a companypany incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act.
The Appellate Assistant Commissioner remanded the matters to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for passing fresh orders of assessment.
Consequently, the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner CT , Kancheepuram was restored and with the result the Revision Petitions filed by the respondent were allowed.
The respondent aggrieved by the judgment of the said Appellate Tribunal filed two Revision Petitions before the High Court, which were registered as Tax Cases Nos.
980 of 1993.
The appellant manufactures electric meters and supplies it to the Electricity Boards.
979 of 1993 and 980 of 1993.
Dalveer Bhandari, J. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 20.11.2001 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No.
Both the appeals were allowed by the said Tribunal.
