TMI Blog1975 (3) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the Act), was challenged on the ground that it was barred by time. The learned single Judge felt bound by the previous decision of this court in the case of S.B. Gurbaksh Singh v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, DelhiCivil Writs Nos. 388-D and 460-D of 1960 decided on 2nd April, 1969 (Delhi High Court)., delivered by Hardy, J., and accepted the writ petition and held that the aforesaid notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, has to be held invalid after 31st March, 1970. The assessment year in question was the year 1965-66 ending on 31st March, 1966, and, therefore, four years from the end of the period of assessment would expire on 31st March, 1970. In view of the decision given in the case of S.B. Gurbaksh Singh(1), the lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of M/s. S.B. Gurbaksh Singh(1) has been reversed by the Division Bench of this Court. The learned counsel for the respondent, however, made the following two additional submissions to support the order of the learned single Judge: (i) that notice dated 10th March, 1970, is a notice for revision of the order of assessment and is barred by rule 66 of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951. (ii) that the notice amounts to a notice of assessment and reassessment of tax under section 11A of the Act and the same having been issued beyond the period of limitation prescribed therein, it is barred by time. These two points were taken in the writ petition but were not urged before the single Bench as the learned single Judge had accepted the conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the application by either party -the assessee or the department, etc.; and the other, suo motu by the Commissioner. The limitation which has been prescribed by sub-rule (2) of rule 66 of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951, is only applicable where the revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner is invoked by an application by either an assessee or the assessing authority. What is material for the applicability of sub-rule (2) of rule 66 is that the Commissioner does not suo motu exercise his powers. As regards suo motu exercise of powers of revision of the Commissioner, that is not subject to any rule of limitation. This contention therefore fails. So far as the second contention that notice amounts to a notice of assessment and reassess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of Income-tax v. A. Raman and Co.(1) The expression "information" in the context in which it occurs must, in our judgment, mean instruction or knowledge derived from external source concerning facts or particulars, or as to law relating to a matter bearing on the assessment. Section 11A of the Act is substantially similar to section 34(1)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Dealing with section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Supreme Court speaking through Shah, J., in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. A. Raman and Co.[1968] 67 I.T.R. 11 (S.C.). held that the information contemplated by subsection (b) of section 147 must involve an external source. Same reasoning should apply he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d thus in the impugned notice: "Whereas you have been assessed to sales tax under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act as extended to the Union Territory of Delhi for the year 1965-66 by Shri T.D. Sharma: vide his order dated 22nd November, 1966. And whereas the aforesaid order is erroneous inasmuch as you have wrongly allowed exemption for the sales of tyres and tubes. And whereas you should have been treated an importer or manufacturer within the meaning of Notification No. F. 4(33)/64 Fin. (E) dated 30th June, 1965, for the sales of tyres and tubes made by you because these tyres and tubes were obtained after dismantling vehicles purchased against local registration certificate or otherwise and had therefore not suffered local tax." It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner. By its very nature, power under sub-section (3) of section 20 of the Act is supervisory over the actions of subordinate officers while the power under section 11A of reassessment can be exercised by the same officer who passed the order of assessment under section 11 of the Act. Since the power under section 11A is in the nature of review and can be exercised by the same officer who passed the order of assessment as per the Rules made under this Act, the legislature has rightly prescribed certain conditions precedent before the power can be exercised. The power of revision is not by way of review; it is by way of superintendence of the order of assessment and other orders passed by the assessing authority. The power has been confer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
