Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + SC VAT and Sales Tax - 2007 (9) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (9) TMI 390 - SUPREME COURTWhether the High Court was right in holding that the Sales Tax Officer (Vigilance) was not entitled to realise the amounts as he has been functioning under the Inspector-General of Police (Vigilance)? Whether the Sales Tax Officer (Vigilance) was entitled to assess and recover/realise the sum of Rs. 32,592 as tax from the assessee? Held that:- Appeal allowed. In the present case, the Sales Tax Officer appointed to search and seize is from the Sales Tax Department and he is a Sales Tax Officer (Vigilance) who has been given the power under section 16D of the Act not only to search and seize the documents but also to recover the amount on the spot. Therefore, on the first point, the High Court had erred in stating that the Sales Tax Officer (Vigilance) was not entitled to assess and recover the tax as he functioned under the Inspector-General of Police. It is well-settled that the concepts of chargeability, assessment, quantification and recovery of tax are independent concepts under any taxing law. Section 12 of the Act refers to assessment whereas provisions after section 15 of the said Act refer to recovery and collection of tax. The scheme of the Act, therefore, is based on the dichotomy between assessment on one hand and recovery of tax on the other hand. Under section 12, the assessing officer has to examine the returns. He may accept the returns.
|