This order shall govern the instant petition (No. 433 of 1954) and also the connected Miscellaneous Petitions (Nos. 434 and 435 of 1954)

2. The petitioners are assessees under the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947. They were assessed to sales tax which was duly paid by them. The Commissioner of Sales tax, however, reopened the assessment under section 22B of the Act and remitted the case to the Regional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Amravati, for making a fresh assessment. Against the order of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, the petitioners have appealed to the Board of Revenue which is the Appellate Tribunal under sub-section (3) of section 22B. The petitioners made an application to the Board of Revenue to stay the proceedings before the Regional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, but the application was rejected on the ground that there was no provision in the Act in regard to stay of proceedings. This order is impugned in these petitions.

3. The general principle laid down in Partington v. Attorney-General ((1869) L.R. 4 H.L. 100 at p. 122), that there is no room in a taxation statute for what is called the equitable construction only applies to the taxing part o