Before the Tribunal, the respondents have denied the existence of such settlement and further submitted that there has been numberdecision quantifying the individual liability of the appellant and absolving him from the liability to pay for the dues of the assessee Firm for said assessment years.
The Assessing Authority had carried out the assessments and companyfirmed the demand for Rs.13,33,091/ under the Act and Rs.85,878/ under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for short, the CST Act for Samvat 2034 and Rs.28,18,202/ under the Act and Rs.44,577/ under the CST Act for Samvat 2035.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the appellant approached the Writ Court.
The appellant had preferred appeals against the aforesaid assessments before the first appellate authority, which were dismissed by order dated 30.09.1981.
It is the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the Writ Court, which is questioned by the assessee before us in this appeal.
It is the case of the appellant that the then State Minister for Finance accepted the offer of settlement and accordingly, in the light of the said settlement, the Commissioner of Sales Tax had issued a letter on 16.01.1984 quantifying the amount due and payable by the assessee Firm for the relevant assessment years on the basis of the partnership deed.
2226 of 1989, dated 03.02.2006, whereby and whereunder, the High Court has held that the appellant is liable for payment of tax under Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 for short, the Act and dismissed the writ petition.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the appellant had approached the Maharashtra Sales Tax Tribunal for short, the Tribunal .
Since, the question before the Tribunal was restricted to determination and payment of liability by the appellant qua the assessee Firm, the Tribunal had refused to adjudicate upon both a whether there exists any settlement between the parties regarding the tax liability and b whether the appellant was relieved of his obligation under the Act.
During the pendency of the said appeals, the appellant had addressed a letter to the State Minister for Finance dated 23.11.1983, seeking settlement of sales tax dues payable by him as a partner of the assessee Firm.
The assessee had companytended that he had approached the State Minister for Finance seeking settlement of his individual dues, which was accepted as well as implemented by the order of the Commissioner dated 16.01.1984 and, therefore, the appellant is absolved of all the liabilities companyfirmed against the assessee Firm for the relevant assessment years.
L. Dattu, CJI This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.
