9911796707
TMI Blog1956 (6) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T. Anantha Babu, the learned counsel for the petitioners, is that the appointment of the Special Commercial Tax Officer (Evasions) is inconsistent with the scheme of the Act. He cannot therefore have jurisdiction to assess the turnover of the petitioners for the purpose of taxing them. Their cases ought to have been dealt with by the Commercial Tax Officer of Kakinada. In order to appreciate this contention, it becomes necessary to read section 2(1)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, hereinafter called "the Act". Section 2(1)(b) defines "assessing authority" which term means "any person authorised by the State Government or by any other authority empowered by them in this behalf, to make any assessment under this Act." It is clear from the definition that either the State Government may directly authorise any person to make any assessment under the Act or such authorisation can be made by any other authority empowered by the Government in that behalf. What was argued was that section 2(1)(b) merely defines what is meant by "assessing authority". That provision does not, it is argued, substantively confer power on the Government or their nominee to authorise any person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve months immediately preceeding the commencement of the Act. Similarly, rule 9 prescribes that every dealer in goods liable to pay tax under the provisions mentioned in that rule and every agent of a nonresident dealer commencing business after 15th June, 1957, shall within 30 days of the commencement of the business submit to the assessing authority of the area in which his principal place of business is situated, a return in Form A. It is true that under these rules, every dealer has to submit his returns to the assessing authority of the area concerned. I have already pointed out that under section 4, it is the State Government which is to assign the local limits to the officers who are appointed by the Government under section 4 of the Act. On the basis of these provisions of law, it was contended by Mr. T. Anantha Babu that the dealers had a right to get their assessment done only by the assessing authorities of the area, in this case, Kakinada. The Special Commercial Tax Officer (Evasions) therefore cannot insist that the assessment of the petitioners shall be made by him. It was therefore contended that the appointment of the Special Commercial Tax Officer and his trying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer (Evasions) whenever he is told or he learns that there has been some suppression or omission in regard to transactions which are liable to be taxed, he can make an assessment in such cases himself. I do not find any possibility of any conflict of assessment between the Commercial Tax Officer and the Special Commercial Tax Officer. Although there is no express provision in the Act, it is obvious that when a case is dealt with by the Special Commercial Tax Officer under the said notification, the Commercial Tax Officer of the area concerned will refrain from dealing with that case. I do not find any inconsistency between the notification appointing the Special Commercial Tax Officer and empowering him to make assessment in cases where transactions were suppressed or omitted from the return. It is for the Special Commercial Tax Officer to select the cases and that he can do if he has informed himself because of some inspection which he made or in any other manner whatsoever. Merely because there are two authorities operating in the same field to some extent, it cannot be said that their appointment and their making assessment would be inconsistent with each other. The law aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is borne in mind that in so far as the procedure relating to making of the assessment is concerned it is the same whether the assessment is made by the Commercial Tax Officer of the area concerned or a Special Commercial Tax Officer (Evasions) appointed under the said G.O., there will be no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that there is no invidious discrimination made between the members of the same class. What Article 14 postulates is that among equals law shall be equal and shall be equally administered. It is not disputed that the assessees, whose transactions have been suspected to be suppressed or omitted (whether or not fraudulent or wilful) can be classed together. Between the members of this class the notification does not make any distinction. It empowers the Special Commercial Tax Officer to select all or such cases which are brought to his notice. The notification clearly provides a guidance to the Special Commercial Tax Officer regarding the cases which he can choose for the purpose of making the assessment. It is only in cases where he detects or it is brought to his notice that there has been some suppression that he makes the assessment. Once he makes that sel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents of Kakinada where they also carry on their business. When the headquarters of the Special Commercial Tax Officer is at Kakinada, I do not know how the petitioners can be said to be inconvenienced because their cases would be dealt with by the Special Commercial Tax Officer (Evasions) rather than by the Commercial Tax Officer at Kakinada. There are no features therefore in these cases which indicate that the impugned G.O. confers uncanalized powers on the Special Commercial Tax Officer (Evasions) particularly when there is a right of appeal and revision under the Act against the assessment order made by any such Special Commercial Tax Officer. I am satisfied that the impugned G.O. does not suffer from the vice of being inconsistent with Article 14 of the Constitution. Finally, it was contended that section 5A is not valid in law. The argument was that it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution as it makes invidious distinction between those assessees whose turnover is more than three lakhs and those whose turnover is less than three lakhs. I had occasion to consider this argument in W.P. No. 1207 of 1964* and I rejected such a contention by the judgment dated 16th June, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
