TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 997X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer has not been exercised carefully and judiciously and the order of this court has not been complied with. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated February 25, 2010 for the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99 both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act are set aside with cost of ₹ 25,000, which will be payable by the Additional Commissioner, Grade I, Commercial Tax, Varanasi Zone I, Varanasi, to the petitioner by account payee cheque within a period of one month. - 555 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 15-4-2010 - RAJES KUMAR AND PANKAJ MITHAL , JJ. Heard Sri Aloke Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. P. Kesarwani, learned Additional Chief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n August 14, 2003 and August 16, 2003 for the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99 under the U.P. Trade Tax Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, respectively and granted approval to initiate proceedings beyond the period of limitation. Being aggrieved, the petitioner challenged the said orders by means of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1154 of 2003. This court vide order dated July 2, 2009 has allowed the writ petition and set aside the orders dated August 14, 2003 and August 16, 2003 on the ground that no reasons have been assigned for not accepting the case of the petitioner and there appears to be no application of mind by the authority concerned to the reply given by the petitioner. It may be mentioned here that earlier the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as passed the impugned orders dated February 25, 2010. In the first para of the impugned orders, the reasons given earlier for granting the approval has been mentioned and, thereafter, in the second para it is stated that on receipt of the report dated January 1, 2010 from the assessing authority, fresh notices have been issued and in pursuance thereof, learned counsel for the assessee appeared and, thereafter, he on perusal of the record and the report sent by the assessing authority, arrived to a conclusion that it is just and expedient to grant the approval. In the impugned orders, neither the contents of the report of the assessing authority have been referred nor any reason has been given for not accepting the reply of the petitioner. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven by the assessing authority, which has been sought by the Additional Commissioner, Grade I, Commercial Tax, Varanasi Zone I, Varanasi in exercise of suo motu powers. He categorically stated that the approval has been granted on the basis of the earlier grounds taken in the earlier proposal and not on the basis of the report given by the assessing authority on the new grounds. The Additional Chief Standing Counsel endorses the aforesaid statement given by the Additional Commissioner, Grade I, Commercial Tax, Varanasi Zone I, Varanasi in the court. On the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner that no reason has been assigned for granting the approval, it is submitted that inadvertently a mistake has been committed and su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er to grant the approval has been given to the Additional Commissioner, Grade I, Commercial Tax, Varanasi Zone I, Varanasi to keep a check on the assessing authority that the proceedings under section 21 of the Act may not be reopened by the assessing authority on flimsy grounds beyond the normal period of limitation. Therefore, while passing the orders in exercise of powers under section 21(2) of the Act, the Additional Commissioner, Grade I, Commercial Tax, Varanasi Zone I, Varanasi, should be more careful and should apply his mind that whether the reasons given in the proposal constitute a material to form the belief of escaped assessment and, it is just and expedient to grant the authorization. We are of the view that under the provi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncerned, we may follow the principle laid down by the Division Bench of this court in the case of S. K. Traders v. Additional Commissioner, Grade I, Trade Tax, Zone, Ghaziabad [2009] 26 VST 601 which held as follows (at page 638): Recently a Division Bench of this court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 563 of 2007 (King Agency v. State of U.P) decided on May 11, 2007 had followed the aforesaid decision and had held that where proceeding has been set aside by this court in exercise of powers under article 226 of the Constitution the period of limitation shall not apply while initiating proceeding thereafter. We are therefore of the considered opinion that the period of limitation provided under the first proviso to sub-section (2) of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
