TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 1130X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r-State trade as well as by effecting sales outside the State of Andhra Pradesh through its branches and depots. The goods are sent on stock transfer from the petitioner's factories in Nellore district to the concerned branches and the branches sell the goods to the authorised wholesale dealers. 4.. For the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81, the assessments were completed by the Commercial Tax Officer (CTO) excluding the branch transfers from taxation, but the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Nellore issued show cause notices on November 14, 1985 proposing to treat stock transfers as inter-State sale. Show cause notices were also issued proposing to assess branch transfers as inter-State sales for the assessment years 1981-82 and 1982-83. The Deputy Commissioner revised the orders of assessment for the years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81 levying tax on branch transfers and similar orders were passed by the CTO, Nellore for the years 1981-82 and 1982-83. Pursuant to the interim directions of the Supreme Court, the petitioner filed appeals to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal against the revisional orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner and also filed appeals ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty Commissioner and held that the transactions were branch transfers and therefore not exigible to tax whereupon the contention of the Revenue that the alleged transactions are inter-State sales was negatived. It was further contended that against the orders passed by the Tribunal in respect of the assessment years 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1980-81, three revisions were filed which having been found to be barred by limitation, were dismissed and thus the appellate order had become final. 8.. In spite of the same, when show cause notices were issued couched in an identical language as in the case of the show cause notices impugned in the writ petitions herein, petitioner filed three writ petitions being W.P. Nos. 10416, 10417 and 10418 and a division Bench of this Court by order dated November 28, 1996 allowed the writ petitions holding as follows: "...........the authorities cannot take any action on the supposition that the judgment of the Tribunal is under consideration by this Court in any tax revision case. The impugned notices are also liable to be set aside on another ground. Under section 20(2-A) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, revisional power cannot be exerci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided by the Tribunal cannot operate as res judicata for other assessment years and cannot prevent the exercise of revisional powers by the Deputy Commissioner except in relation to the particular assessment year in respect of which an appeal is pending before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal or in respect of which the question or issue has been decided by the Tribunal. It should be borne in mind that, if the sales tax authorities are aggrieved by the issue or question decided by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal either in the appeal, which was pending at the time or in a particular appeal which has already been decided, they can always approach the High Court on a reference so that the matter can be ultimately decided or they can come to the High Court in the exercise of the revisional powers. Under these circumstances, this contention based on section 20(2-A) cannot help the petitioner." 12.. Doubting the correctness of the division Bench decision of this Court in Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Limited v. Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes [1978] 42 STC 372, the division Bench has referred these writ petitions to a larger Bench as to the interpretation of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellate Tribunal in relation to the earlier assessment year. A distinction must be borne in mind that had the intention of the Legislature been otherwise, the same could have been specified in explicit language as was done in section 264(4)(c) of the Income-tax Act. 15.. The words "issue or question" are of wide amplitude. An issue or question may arise in relation to the selfsame assessee in respect of any assessment year or it may arise after some years in relation to some other assessee. If such issue or question was the subject-matter of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal or if it had been decided by the Appellate Tribunal under section 21, evidently, on a plain reading of sub-section (2-A) of section 20, the same cannot be the subject-matter of revision under sub-section (1) of section 21 of the Act. Furthermore, judicial and administrative discipline demands that inferior authority must act in terms of the decision of a superior authority. 16.. In Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer [1960] 40 ITR 618 (SC); AIR 1961 SC 182, the Income-tax Officer, Bhopal has refused to carry out certain directions given by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appearing for the State. In State of Andhra v. Arisetty Sriramulu [1957] 8 STC 153 a Full Bench of the Andhra High Court was considering the provisions of section 12-A(6)(a) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The question which was referred to the Full Bench was what is the correct interpretation of section 12-A(6)(a) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. The power of review and power of revision are not identical. In that case it was held that rule 18(I) was wider than order 47, rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It was held that the mistake could be rectified irrespective of how it occurred or whether it relates to an issue of fact or a point of law. 19.. As regards the applicability of principles of res judicata, however, the Full Bench observed: "There is no doubt some authority for this proposition. We are here concerned with the interpretation of a specific statutory provision empowering the Appellate Tribunal to grant a review and not with the inherent powers, if any, of the Tribunal. Reference was also made to the provisions of Order 20, rule 3, Civil Procedure Code, to the effect that a judgment once pronounced and signed could not be altered or added to except as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Taxes, Hyderabad [1991] 80 STC 99 this Court held: "The idea underlying section 20(2-A) is to give finality and primacy to the decision of the Tribunal vis-a-vis an issue or question decided by the Tribunal in a lis between the same parties in respect of a particular period of assessment, subject, of course, to the result of a revision to the High Court. To construe it otherwise would lead to anomalous consequences. For instance, if the Appellate Tribunal has decided a particular issue or question in any case, it would for all the time to come, fetter the hands of the revisional authority from revising the order of the subordinate authority notwithstanding the fact that the High Court or Supreme Court had taken a contrary view subsequently. We have, therefore, no hesitation in rejecting the first contention of the petitioner." It was further held: "In the face of the reassessment order passed by the Commercial Tax Officer subjecting a part of the turnover to surcharge in addition to the tax already levied, it was unnecessary and in fact beyond the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner to go back to the original assessment and adjudicate upon the legality or propriety of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nbefore, it is not necessary that principles of res judicata must be read in the said provision. It merely creates a bar in the exercise of jurisdiction by the revisional authority. 25.. A question or issue may be on fact or in law. Where it involves a question or issue as of fact, the same may be held to be confined to that particular order and in relation to another assessment year, the fact may be different. But, if the issue or question relates to a point of law, the intention of the Legislature appears to be that the assessee should not be vexed on such question again and again. As indicated hereinbefore if a question or issue decided by the Appellate Tribunal is in conflict with the decision of the High Court or the Supreme Court, naturally, the latter will prevail. But unless so done, the Commissioner, on a plain reading of the aforementioned provisions, must be held to be bound by such decision of the Tribunal on question of law. A liberal meaning has normally to be attributed while interpreting a statute. 26.. In Sutters v. Briggs (1922) 1 Appeal Cases 1 the Privy Council held: "There is indeed no reason for limiting the natural and ordinary meaning of the words used ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und to give effect to that meaning, irrespective of the consequences. It is said that the words themselves best declare the intention of the law-giver." 30.. The court while considering a statute is only concerned with the legislative policy. Once the legislative policy is found to be clear and unambiguous, it cannot add any words therein to give a different meaning or to read the same in such manner as a result whereof a different meaning would be attributed. With great respect to the learned Judges, the division Bench in Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Limited v. Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes [1978] 42 STC 372 (AP) has proceeded on the principle of res judicata but did not advert to the real question. 31.. The State can provide for a right of appeal or revision. The State can also create such a right to a party to the lis subject to fulfilment of some conditions. It can also grant a limited revisional power to a higher authority. The power of revision vested in the Commissioner being circumscribed under sub-section (2-A) of section 20 of the Act, something may not be read therein which would confer a wide power upon the Commissioner as a result whereo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
