9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue and has reversed their earlier order dated 4th July, 2008. 2. Having heard the counsel for the parties, the following substantial question of law is framed:- "Whether the Tribunal was justified in exercising power under Section 48 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 and review their earlier order dated 4th July, 2008?" 3. With the consent of counsels, the appeal is taken up for hearing and disposal. 4. The assessment year in question is 1984-85. After the original assessment order was framed on 17th March, 1989, there have been several rounds with the appellate authorities remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer. The last order of remand was passed by the Tribunal in Appeal No.669/STT/99. We are not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d signed the order on the said date. Further the dispatch vide endorsement No.SST/01/1054 was dated 6.6.2002. Thus and therefore the Tribunal had incorrectly taken the date of order passed by the Tribunal in Appeal No.669/STT/99 as 12.11.2001 instead of 6.6.2002 or 31.5.2002. The contention of the revenue was that this was an error which was apparent and, therefore, amendable to rectification under Section 48 of the Act. 8. By the impugned order the Tribunal has accepted and held that the order passed by the Tribunal in Appeal No. 669/STT/99 was dated 31.5.2002. The Tribunal has further held that if the order of the Tribunal in Appeal No.669/STT/99 is taken as dated 31.5.2002, then the assessment order passed on remand dated 25.5.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions of sub-section (6) shall be made after the expiry of six years" and second part of this provision is constituted by the words "from the end of year in respect of which or part of which the tax is assessable". The first proviso to section 23(7) pertains to the first part of section 23(7) and the second proviso pertain to the second part of section 23(7) of the Local Act. So far as the explanation is concerned, this explanation refers to the revised limitation period and this revised limitation period is what has been laid down by first proviso". 15. Before proceeding further one contention of ld. Counsel for the appellant needs to be discussed. He submitted that in this case the remanded assessment was finalized in consequence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n our anxious consideration to the rival contentions and have closely perused the provisions of Section 23(7) of the Act, particularly the specific provisions dealing with assessment made in consequence of, or to give effect to the orders of the Appellate authority. Evidently the explanation attached to the sub-section is explicit in the sense that after the commencement of the "Act 2000" the limitation period of one year and nine months only is applicable in the instant case and the period of one year and nine months is to be reckoned from the date of the orders passed by the Tribunal pursuant to which the Ld. Assessing Authority had framed the Assessment. Admittedly in this case, the Tribunal's Order is dated 12.11.2001 and the impugned O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
