TMI Blog1960 (9) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Bihar Sales Tax Act as amended by Bihar Finance Act of 1951 (Bihar Act VII of 1951). The argument was rejected by the Commissioner of Sales Tax on the ground that the amendment does not apply to the present case because the order of the Assistant Superintendent of Sales Tax was made on the 8th August, 1949, long before the Amendment Act came into force, and the period of limitation prescribed by the Amendment Act cannot be applied to the present case. An application in revision was taken on behalf of the assessee to the Board of Revenue, but the application was dismissed. As directed by the High Court, the Board of Revenue has now stated a case under section 25(3) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act on the following question of law: "Whether the Commissioner of Sales Tax had authority to revise the order of the Assistant Superintendent of Sales Tax, dated the 8th August, 1949, in respect of the quarter ending the 31st March, 1949, in view of the amended section 24(4) of the statute, in the circumstances of this case. " On behalf of the assessee learned counsel put forward the argument that the order of the Commissioner of Sales Tax was passed on the 11th August, 1954, more than a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly a matter of procedure. It appears to us that such a right becomes vested in the Commissioner on the date when the proceedings were initiated, and, in any case, not later than the time of assessment, which in this case is the 8th of August, 1949. If the right of revision given to the Commissioner was a vested right on the 8th of August, 1949, it follows that the vested right cannot be taken away by the Amendment Act of 1951 except by express language or by necessary intendment. It is well-established by numerous authorities that an intention to take away or to impair or to imperil such a vested right cannot be presumed unless such intention be clearly manifested by express words or by necessary implication. We are, therefore, of opinion that in the present case the amended section 24(4) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act does not apply, and the period of limitation prescribed in the Amended Act does not apply to the order of the Commissioner made in this case. If the old section 24(4) of the statute applies, it is not disputed that the order of revision passed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax, on the 11th of August, 1954, is not vitiated by any error of law. The view that we take is bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nse explained above arose before the date of amendment of the section. Further, even if the 'lis' is to be taken as arising only on the date of assessment, there was a possibility of such a 'lis' arising as soon as proceedings started with the filing of the return or, at any rate, when the authority called for evidence and started the hearing and the right of appeal must be taken to have been in existence even at those dates. For the purposes of the accrual of the right of appeal the critical and relevant date is the date of initiation of the proceedings and not the decision itself." In the present case the return of the assessee was filed before the 8th of August, 1949, which was the date of the order of assessment passed by the Assistant Superintendent of Sales Tax. Applying the principle of the Supreme Court decision to this case we are of opinion that the right of revision vested in the Commissioner of Sales Tax at least on the 8th of August, 1949, when the order of assessment was made by the Assistant Superintendent of Sales Tax. If this view is correct, then it follows that the Amendment Act of 1951 cannot affect the vested right of the Commissioner under the old section of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so to section 12(2) of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, 1950, which was inserted in 1955 and which became operative from the 15th of April, 1955, could not apply to an application made by a dealer for revision of an order made under the Act passed in assessment proceedings initiated before the 15th of April, 1955, and the imposition of the condition of the payment of the entire assessed tax as a condition precedent to the competence of a revision petition could not affect the dealer's right of revision from an order in assessment proceedings which commenced prior to the insertion of the third proviso to section 12(2), which right was free from any such restrictions under the section as it stood at the time of the commencement of the assessment proceedings. Reference may also be made to a decision of the Bombay High Court in Nana Bin Aba v. Sheku Bin Andu[1908] I.L.R. 32 Bom. 337., where it was pointed out by Sir Lawrence Jenkins that the word "right" in section 7, clause (c), of the General Clauses Act must mean and include the right of appeal or revision or transfer and that such a right was a substantive right. It was pointed out by a Full Bench of this High Court in Budhi Nath ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
