Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1987 (6) TMI 387

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... S.R.O. 116/66. The assessee had filed appeals before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Appeals). For the first two years the appeals were disposed of on 10th May, 1978 and for the year 1974-75 the appeal was disposed of on 26th April, 1978. The Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Central Zone), Ernakulam, took the view that the assessee is not entitled to the benefit of the concession contemplated by notification, S.R.O. 116/66, and initiated suo motu revision proceedings under section 35(2A) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act by issuing notice dated 6th November, 1979. By order dated 30th January, 1980, the Deputy Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax (Central Zone), Ernakulam, set aside the assessment orders for all .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by the petitioner were dismissed by the common order rendered for all the three years dated 11th January, 1983. The assessee has come up in revisions. 2.. We heard counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Jose, as also the counsel for the Revenue, Mr. Nambiar. In view of the recent Division Bench decision of this Court in Palghat Oil Mills v. State of Kerala [1987] 65 STC 169, the petitioner's counsel did not press the plea that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of notification, S.R.O. 116/66. No argument was advanced regarding the applicability of S.R.O. 116/66. 3.. The petitioner's counsel contended that the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Central Zone) was incompetent to initiate suo motu revision proceedings under section 35(2A) o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... only to "a matter of procedure" and the enlarged jurisdiction under section 35(2A) of the Act can be invoked by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax to revise the orders, which were immune from the suo motu proceedings, long before the said section was inserted in the statute book. On the other hand, counsel for the Revenue contended that section 35(2A) is merely procedural in character. It enables the Deputy Commissioner to exercise suo motu power within one year from the date of the order in the appeal or before the end of 4 years from the date of the assessment order. Admittedly, the order passed in the suo motu revision by the Deputy Commissioner in this case is within the period of 4 years. The points mooted in the revisions were not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed that a wider or enlarged jurisdiction is vested in the Deputy Commissioner to suo motu revise orders, under section 35(2A) of the Act. As per section 35 of the Act, as it stood on the day when the assessments were rendered in these cases (15th March, 1977), and still later when the appeals were filed by the assessee against these three orders, suo motu revision by the Deputy Commissioner was not possible under section 35(2)(b), since the assessment orders were made the subject of appeals. In other words, the assessment orders acquired finality subject to the disposal of the appeals filed by the assessee. In this view of the matter, it appears to us, that the new provision, section 35(2A) of the Act, affects or impairs the existing rights .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing the judgment of the seven member Bench, Shah, J., held at page 1339, paragraph 7, as follows: "The order of the appellate court, subject to scrutiny by the High Court within the limited field permitted by section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code, was final. In conferring upon the High Court a wider jurisdiction for the purpose of determining whether the decision of the appellate court was according to law, the legislature did not attempt to legislate in the matter of procedure. The legislature expressly sought to confer upon the High Court power to reopen questions which till then were to be deemed finally decided." It was held that the Amendment Act will not have retrospective operation. In the light of the above decision, we hold t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates