In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 10.06.2010 Coram : THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE F.M.IBRAHIM KALIFULLA and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH Tax Case (Revision) No.20 of 2010 Tvl.Orjay Packaging Products 3/278, Thadagam Road Coimbatore. .. Petitioner vs. State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Commercial Tax Officer Thudialur Circle Coimbatore. .. Respondent Tax Case Revision filed under Section 9(2-A) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, against the order of the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Addl. Bench), Coimbatore passed in C.T.A.No.279 of 1996 dated 18.09.1997. T.C.20 of 2010 is filed against C.T.A.279 of 1996 on the file of Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Additonal Bench, Coimbatore dated 18.9.97 against the Order dated 31.5.96 on the file of Appellate Assistant Commisssioner(C.T), Coimbatore in Appeal No.C.S.T. 13/96 dt. against order dated 11.12.95 iln CST.No.577233/94-95 on the file of Commercial Tax Officer, Thidiyalur Circle For Petitioner : Mr.P.Radhakrishnan For Respondent : Mr.Haja Naziruddin Spl. Govt. Pleader (Taxes). O R D E R (Judgment of the Court was delivered by F.M.IBRAHIM KALIFULLA,J.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Haja Nazirrudin, learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes), who took notice for the respondent. 2. The substantial question of law raised in this revision is whether the transaction carried out by the petitioner is 'sale' or https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 'works contract'. In fact, this order of assessment came to be passed on 11.12.1995 and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner passed an order dated 03.05.1996 confirming the assessment made by the original authority. The Tribunal, by the impugned order dated 18.09.1997, has affirmed the order of original authority as well as that of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Though the revision came to be filed in the year 1998, it has come up for admission only today after twelve long years. 3. A perusal of the order of assessment disclose that the petitioner reported the turnover based on its accounts and also filed 'Form-C' declarations claiming concessional rate of tax. The assessment year related to 1994-95 under the CST Act. Having thus submitted itself to the assessment being made virtually admitting the transaction as one of sale, the petitioner cannot now be permitted to take a 'U' turn and raise a question as to whether it will fall under one of 'sale' or 'works contract'. It is too late in the day for the petitioner to raise such a question and we do not find any merits to entertain this revision. Even otherwise, a perusal of the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as that of the Tribunal would satisfactorily explain as to how the transaction of the petitioner would fall within the four corners of expression "sale" and such a finding having been rendered based on the facts involved in this case, we do not find any scope to entertain this revision. 4. For all the above stated reasons, the revision fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ATR To 1. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal Coimbatore Bench. 2. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT) Coimbatore. 3. The Commercial Tax Officer Thudiyalur Circle Coimbatore – 18. TC (R) No.20 of 2010 ka(co)pmk.22.6.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/