mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO.22 OF 2009 IN SALES TAX APPLICATION NO.34 OF 2009 IN REFERENCE APPLICATION NO.106 OF 2008 M/s.Vijay Anand & Co. ... Petitioners versus The Commissioner of Sales Tax ... Respondent ... Ms.I. Calcuttawala, AGP for petitioners. Mr. V.P. Patkar with Mr.M.M. Vaidya for respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATED : 16th October 2009 P.C. 1. By this review, the petitioner along with the respondent points out that the question in respect of which reference has been called by order dated 21st August 2009 are not questions which arises in this reference and there appears to be some typographical error. 2. We have heard parties and we find that the question referred to earlier would not arise from the order passed by the Tribunal. To this extent, the order dated 21st August 2009 is recalled. 3. The Tribunal is directed to refer the following question instead to this court within 12 weeks from today. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is jusfified in holding of the flavouring compound covered by the Schedule Entry C-I-19 and C-I-20 for the periods from 1.4.95 to 30.6.95 and 1.7.95 to 31.3.96 respectively are are liable to tax @ 4% sales tax and in Schedule Entry C-II-78 and C-II-84 of the Bombay Sales Tax? In the light of that, review application is allowed. Tribunal is directed to refer the aforementioned question to this court. Revision application is disposed of accordingly. (D.G. KARNIK,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)