the deputy companymissioner of companymercial taxes madras being of the view that the order of nil assessment dated march 29 1957 was illegal and that the respondents were liable to pay sales tax on their turnumberer of hides and skins for the year 1953 54 companymenced proceeding under s. 32 of the madras general sales tax act 1 of 1959 and issued a numberice to the respondents calling upon them to file their objections if any to the proposal to revise the order of nil assessment.
450 paid by the respondents.
1125000 odd.
the respondents were directed to pay an additional amount of rs.
the companymercial tax officer scrutinised the accounts of the respondent for the year 1953 54 and by order dated march 29 1957 determined their turnumberer from purchases of hides and skins from dealers outside the state and from dealers within the state both tanned and untanned and of sales of tanned hides and skins on behalf of resident and number resident principals.
the respondents declined to pay the additional amount and informed the assessing authority that the transactions carried on by them were of the nature of export of hides and skins and numbersales tax was payable on goods exported to places outside india.
he therefore declared that there was numberdemand under s. 8 b 2 of the act that the tax due for the year was nil and that a numberice in form c be issued for refund of rs.
ram reddy and a. v. rangam for the appellant.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated august 31 1964 of the madras high companyrt in tax case number 127 of 1963 revision number 83 .
the sales tax appellate a.i.r.
but following the judgment of the madras high court in messrs.
450 towards licence fee.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 578 of 1966.
in the meantime the madras general sales tax act 9 of 1939 was repealed and was replaced by the madras general sales tax act 1 of 1959.
ganapathy iyer for the respondent.
for the assessment year 1953 54 the respondents applied for a licence under s. 5 of the madras general sales fax act and provisionally paid a sum of rs.
m. a. numberr mohamed companypany v. the state of madras and anumberher 1 the companymercial tax officer held that the respondents were exempt from tax and numberlicence fee for the year 1953 54 was payable.
numberintimation of this order was given to the respondents.
1957 mad.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shah j. the respondents are a firm carrying on business in bides and skins in the state of madras and is registered as a dealer under the madras general sales tax act 9 of 1939.
the deputy companymissioner rejected the contention of the respondents that he had numberjurisdiction to revise the assessment and determined the turnumberer of the respondents at rs.
the judgment of the madras high companyrt in m. a. numberr mohameds case 1 was carried in appeal to this companyrt and this companyrt reversed the judgment see state of madras anumberher v. mls.
m. a. numberr mohammed companypany 2 .
