Dr. B. P. Saraf, J. —

These 8 writ petitions involve common questions of law and facts and as such they were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

The main question for determination in these cases relates to the scope and ambit of the power of the Commissioner to exercise suo motu power of revision under sub-section (I) of section 21 of the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 (hereinafter 'the Act'). The facts of these cases lie in a narrow compass. To avoid repetition, facts of Civil Rule No. 182/82 only are being stated.

The petitioner, who is a dealer carrying on business of manufacture, sale and supply of bricks etc. was assessed by the Superintendent of Taxes, Agartala under section 9 (3) of the Act after examining his books of account etc. The periods involved were periods ending 31.3.77, 31.3,78 and 31.3.79. While making the assessments the Superintendent of Taxes considered the sale figure of taxable and non-taxable goods disclosed by the petitioner and on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case determined the turnover of the petitioner and completed the assessment. That was done on 19. 5. 81 by three different orders. After

Click Here to Read the rest of this document