[Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.] The Tax Case revision has been filed against the order of the Joint Commissioner (CT) (SMR) of Commercial Taxes in his Ref.No.N2/F2/76416/96, SMR No.631/97 dated 27.03.2003.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that the issue involved in this Tax Case Revision has already been decided by this Court in T.C.(MD)Nos.674, 765, 683 of 2006 & 217 of 2011 dated 27.06.2017, (The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Tvl. Ratna Lamination), wherein, it has been held as follows:
?3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/dealer submitted that similarly placed dealers had approached the Government seeking for waiver of tax and penalty payable by the dealers on works contract of picture varnish coating for the Assessment year 1986 to 1998 under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. The petitioner case also falls within the said period. When the assessment was under the provision of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, the Government after consideration of the representation given by the picture varnish coating dealers, accepted the decision of the waiver committee waiving a sum of Rs.40,57,949/- being the tax, Surcharge and Additional Sales Tax and penalty payable under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 by 20 dealers in respect of picture varnish coating for the period from 26.06.1986 to 04.05.1998 under item 7 of Appendix 21 of chapter II, of the Tamil Nadu Financial Code Volume-II.
4.The learned counsel for the respondent sought time to ascertain as to whether the respondent/dealer was one among the 20 dealers which has been granted the benefit of the tax and penalty.
5.However, today (27.06.2017) when the matter is taken up for disposal, the learned counsel does not have written instructions as to whether the respondent/dealer has been granted such exemption. However considering the fact that 20 dealers had approached the waiver committee and the waiver committee having made a recommendation which has been accepted by the Government, unless they are any distinct circumstances in the respondent case, the benefit of waiver should also accrue to the respondent. In the light of the Government Order in G.O(D)No.37,Commercial Taxes and Registration (D2) Department, dated 27.01.2017, it indicates that the respondent has not been granted the benefit of waiver.
6.The first appellant is therefore directed to consider the question of the waiver, in the light of G.O(D)No.37, Commercial Taxes and Registration (D2) Department, dated 27.01.2017. Till such consideration is made, the tax and penalty shall not be demanded from the respondent.?
3.Following the above decision, the present Tax Case Revision is also dismissed on similar lines. No costs.
To The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer ? I, Sivakasi.
.