TMI Blog1976 (7) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reassessment by an order dated 16th September, 1969. The assessing authority passed a fresh order on 31st December, 1970. Aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal which came up for hearing before the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), Sales Tax, Meerut. An objection was raised on behalf of the department that as the assessee had not deposited 20 per cent of the tax assessed the appeal was not maintainable in view of the amendment made in section 9 by Amendment Act No. 3 of 1971. The contention was upheld and the appeal was dismissed. The assessee filed a revision which was allowed by the Additional Judge (Revisions), Meerut, relying on a decision given by the Supreme Court reported in Hoosein Kasam Dada (India) Ltd. v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 9 as it stood before the amendment, i.e., without complying with the requirement of depositing 20 per cent of the assessed tax. Reliance for this proposition has mainly been placed on Hoosein Kasam Dada (India) Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh[1953] 4 S.T.C. 114 at 118, 122 (S.C.); A.I.R. 1953 S.C. 221. Counsel for the department has, on the other hand, placed reliance on a decision reported in Hardeodas v. Assam State[1970] 26 S.T.C. 10 (S.C.); A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 724.It is settled by a series of decisions that a right of appeal is a substantive right and not merely a matter of procedure: see Janardan Reddy v. State A.I.R. 1951 S.C. 124., Ganpat Rai Hiralal v. Aggarwal Chamber of Commerce Ltd.A.I.R. 1952 S.C. 409., Hoosein Kasam Dada (India) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Company Ltd. v. Irving[1905] A.C. 369." It was further held on page 122 that: "This right of appeal from the decision of an inferior tribunal to a superior tribunal becomes vested in a party when proceedings are first initiated in, and before a decision is given by, the inferior court." Proceedings for assessment or reassessment are initiated either by issue of notice or by filing of return. In this case notices were issued to the assessee for escaped assessment in 1966 and the assessment order was passed on 19th October, 1966. The proceedings, therefore, in our opinion, were initiated in the year 1966, at least after the passing of the assessment order and before the section was amended by Act No. 3 of 1971. The ratio laid down by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n retrospective effect so as to apply to assessment periods ending on September 30, 1956, March 31, 1957, and September 30, 1957. We are unable to accept this argument as correct because the assessments for these three periods were completed after the amending Act came into force, i.e., after April 1, 1958. The appeals against the assessments were also filed after the amendment. It is therefore not correct to say that the amending Act has been given a retrospective effect and the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes was therefore right in asking the appellant to comply with the provisions of the amended section 30 of the Act before dealing with the appeals." We may point out that 4th April, 1950, mentioned in the judgment appears to be a typog ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
