Judgment :- 1. The Revenue is the petitioner herein. The respondent is an assessee to Sales-tax. We are concerned with the assessment year 1957-58. The respondent was a dealer in hill produce and timber at Calicut. The firm was assessed to sales-tax, by order dated 30-1-1960. According to the Revenue, the firm was constituted on 2-12-1957 as could be seen from the intimation sent to the Sales Tax Officer on 23-2-1978. There was an appeal from the order of assessment dated 30-1-1960. It was dismissed on 12-12-1973. There was a further appeal before the Appellate Tribunal as TA No. 213 of 1974. The Appellate Tribunal held that further investigation is necessary about the dissolution of the firm which was pleaded before it. The assessee made a plea before the Appellate Tribunal that the assessment made on 30-1-1960 was on a dissolved firm and that as per the provisions of 1125 Act, a dissolved firm cannot be assessed to tax. It was for investigating this aspect of the matter, the Appellate Tribunal ordered a remit. After the remit, the Sales Tax Officer passed a fresh assessment order. He held that the firm constituted on 2-12-1957 stood dissolved with effect from 12-11-1958. He further held that there was no bar to the proceedings being continued in view of the provisions of S.61 of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act. 4963. The-decision of this Court in C.N. Savankutty v. State of Kerala (42 STC 204) was relied on in support of the above stand. The appeal filed by the assessee before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was futile. In second appeal, the Appellate Tribunal distinguished the decision in Savankutty's case (42 STC 204) and held that in this case the original assessment order itself was passed before 1963 Act came into force and since the proceedings were initiated under 1125 Act which did not permit an assessment to be made on a dissolved firm, the order of assessment should stand nullified. The Revenue has come up in revision. 2. We heard counsel for the Revenue, Mr. Nambiar. The respondent was not represented. On a perusal of the order of the Appellate Tribunal we are satisfied that the approach and conclusion of the Appellate Tribunal is clearly wrong. The Revenue has come up in revision. 2. We heard counsel for the Revenue, Mr. Nambiar. The respondent was not represented. On a perusal of the order of the Appellate Tribunal we are satisfied that the approach and conclusion of the Appellate Tribunal is clearly wrong. In para 3 of the order, the Appellate Tribunal has observed as follows: "The assessment proceedings had been initiated and completed under the old Act itself so that when the new Act came into force, there were no assessment proceedings pending with the assessing authority. There was, therefore, no question of continuation of the proceedings under the new Act. The provisions in the new Act could be of no avail to validate at assessment on a dissolved firm made under the provisions of the old Act. Since the assessment proceedings bad been concluded before the repeal of the old Act, what we have to consider is whether the assessment finalised under the old Act was proper and valid in law." It cannot admit of any doubt that though the original assessment was made under the old Act, on the day when the KGST Act came into force, proceedings were still pending. They were pending before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal filed before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was dismissed on 12-12-1973. There was a further appeal before the Tribunal as TA No. 213 of 1984. The Tribunal ordered a remit. It is trite law that assessment proceedings commence either by the filing of a return by the assessee or by the issue of a notice by the assessing authority. It cannot also admit of any doubt that when once the assessment proceedings commence, they will continue till a final order of assessment is made in regard to the said return (notice). Here, the order of assessment passed on 30-1-1960 was set aside by the Appellate Tribunal. There was a remit. On that day, the Kerala General Sales Tax Act had come into force. The proceedings started under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125 had not ended. They were pending. The final assessment order was yet to be passed, after the remit. That order was made only after the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 came into force. The Appellate Tribunal did not care to apply its mind to the principle of law enunciated by the Supreme Court in Chenshyamdas v. Regional Asst. They were pending. The final assessment order was yet to be passed, after the remit. That order was made only after the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 came into force. The Appellate Tribunal did not care to apply its mind to the principle of law enunciated by the Supreme Court in Chenshyamdas v. Regional Asst. Commissioner of Sales Tax (1963) 14 STC 9761. In the light of the said decision, it cannot be said that there was no assessment proceedings pending when the new Act came into force. The decision of the Appellate Tribunal is erroneous in law. 3. We set aside the order of the Appellate Tribunal dated 10-4-1984. The TRC is allowed. The order passed by the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) is restored.