VEERASWAMI, C.J

The turnover in question relating to what is stated to be lending of cotton is the subject-matter of an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The matter relates to the year 1967-68. For the earlier year, we are told that a similar turnover was considered by the Tribunal, which was of opinion that the transactions amounted to lending and they were not sales. When the appeal in respect of the year 1967-68 is pending, we do not think it desirable and necessary to deal with the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution. Normally, the assessee should be compelled to resort to the statutory remedy. In fact, in this case, he has availed himself of it and he must await the result.

But an apprehension is expressed on behalf of the assessee that because a tax case has been filed against the Tribunal's decision relating to the year 1967-68, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner might feel that he was not bound by the view of the Tribunal. We consider that in the hierarchy of authority set up under the Act, the Tribunal is superior to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who is bound by the orders of the Tribunal. The orders of the