Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957
Sree Ramachandra Ginning And Oil Mills ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 16 September, 1966
7. The two cases of this court relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondent, Kalluri Bheemalingam and Ors., In re [1967] 19 S.T.C. 116 and Sree Ramachandra Ginning and Oil Mills v. State of A.P. [1967] 19 S.T.C. 354, do not at all render any assistance to the respondent for the reason that the learned Judges were only concerned with the question whether Sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Act provides for a right of revision at the instance of an assessee. There is a bar to such a revision at the instance of the assessee and, therefore, the learned Judges held that Section 20(1) of the Act does not provide for a right of revision at the instance of an assessee, but only provides for a revision by the Board of Revenue suo motu.
East Asiatic Company (India) Ltd. vs The State Of Madras on 5 May, 1954
8. The power of revision suo motu or on his own motion is conferred on the Deputy Commissioner to safeguard the revenue of the State and the interests of the State are as much the interests of the assessee too. As pointed out by Ramaswami, J., of the Madras High Court in East Asiatic Company (India) Ltd. v. State of Madras [1956] 7 S.T.C. 299 at p. 315:
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Section 21 in Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
1