ISMAIL, C.J.

In this tax revision case, admittedly the assessee did not produce the C forms before the assessing officer. The C forms were produced before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner when the assessee had preferred an appeal before him. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner declined to entertain the C forms at that stage. Against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore. The Tribunal received the C forms, set aside the order of assessment and remanded the matter. The Tribunal itself pointed out as follows :

"The fact that the appellant has chosen to produce form No. XVII and C form at that stage is not a ground for rejecting them. If the appellants are not guilty of laches, certainly the C form and the form No. XVII deserve to be received even at the appellate stage. The contention of the appellants is that they got C form and form No. XVII after much difficulty from the dealers and the delay is due to the reasons beyond their control. We accept the plea of the appellants that they are entitled to file the C form and form No. XVII at this stage. Therefore the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner is liable to be set aside and the entire matter deserves to be remanded to the assessing officer for receiving the C form and the form No. XVII and for fresh disposal of the matter on merits." *

We have admitted the tax revision case preferred by the State against the order of the Tribunal. However, we are of the opinion that the legal position in this behalf has to be laid down with some degree of certainty, since the matter is one of repeated occurrence. Rule 12 of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, 1957, deals with the production of the certificate in form No. XVII and C forms. Rule 12(7) reads as follows :

"Rule 12. (7) The declaration in form C or form F or the certificate in form E-I or form E-II shall be furnished to the prescribed authority up to the time of assessment by the first assessing authority :

Provided that if the prescribed authority is satisfied that the person concerned was prevented by sufficient cause from furnishing such declaration or certificate within the aforesaid time, that authority may allow such declaration or certificate to be furnished within such further time as that authority may permit."

It is not in dispute that the" prescribed authority" *

contemplated in that rule is the first assessing authority itself. The proviso to the rule makes it absolutely clear that it is in the discretion of the prescribed authority, namely, the first assessing authority, to allow such declaration or certificate to be furnished within such further time to be given by the authority and no other authority has got power in this behalf. The matter came before a Bench of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Chellaram Garments (P.) Ltd. The facts in that case appear to be identical with the facts of the present case which we have set out already. In that case, the Bench has observed as follows :

"The petitioner had filed the C forms before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner belatedly. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner declined to accept the C forms. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the assessing authority for the purpose of finding out whether those C forms could be entertained. As the conclusion of the Tribunal in restoring the matter to the assessing authority for the purpose of considering the entertainability of the C forms is correct, we do not think it necessary to interfere with the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. In was not necessary or proper for the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal to go into the question as to whether the assessee's failure to ask for time was due to negligence or not. This aspect can only be gone into by the assessing authority. As the remand order as such cannot be said to be erroneous, we do not think