Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2001 (10) TMI 1135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tioner for the period ending September 30, 1988 was completed by the assessing officer under section 9(4) of the Assam Finance (Sales) Tax Act, 1956. The aforesaid assessment order was passed after taking into consideration the report submitted by the Inspector of Taxes acting under the provisions of the Act. Tax to Oral. the extent mentioned in the assessment order was assessed and recovered. Thereafter, it appears that a notice for reopening the aforesaid assessment under section 18 of the Act, which had come into operation in the meantime, was issued to the petitioner on August 13, 1993. The petitioner submitted his reply to the said notice on October 8, 1993 which was followed by further explanations on October 19, 1993. According .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d that turnover of Rs. 7,26,780 has escaped assessment for the period in question. Aggrieved by the said order, the instant writ petition has been filed. 3.. Mr. N.C. Phukan, learned State Counsel, at the outset has raised an objection that the instant writ petition ought not to be adjudicated on merits in as much as under the provisions of section 33(2)(a) of the Act, the petitioner has his remedy by way of a statutory appeal to the Tribunal. Under section 5A of the Act pending constitution of the Appellate Tribunal, the appellate powers have been vested in the Board of Revenue. According to the learned State Counsel the writ petitioner ought to have exhausted the statutory remedy available to him before initiating the present proceedin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ified quantity of bricks as a result of which the turnover of the petitioner has escaped assessment to tax. Dr. Saraf by relying on the replies submitted to the notice issued under section 18 of the Act (annexure IV) has contended that the authority having initiated a proceeding for reopening of the assessment and thereafter, having abandoned the same, it would not be open for the revisional authority, i.e., the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes to invoke the suo motu powers under section 36 on the same set of facts. Dr. Saraf has further argued that the expression erroneous as appearing under section 36 of the Act has been interpreted by a division Bench of this Court in the case of Rajendra Singh v. Superintendent of Taxes reported in [1990] .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he instant writ petition which has been noticed and answered in an earlier para of the judgment, has submitted that the exercise of suo motu revisional powers under section 36 in the facts of the instant case is a wholesome exercise of powers vested by law in the authority and the same does not require any interference. 6.. I have considered the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties. What is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue so as to enable the exercise of suo motu revisional powers has been answered in numerous decisions of this Court as well as various other High Courts interpreting pari materia provisions of similar statutes. An erroneous order cannot be equated with a wrong order as understood in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g of the powers resulting in confusion and uncertainty, a situation definitely not contemplated by any statute. 7.. In the instant case, it is not the stand of the Deputy Commissioner that the primary authority did not have the jurisdiction to make the assessment or had exceeded its jurisdiction. The short and simple case of the Deputy Commissioner is that the turnover of the petitioner has escaped assessment due to the concealments made by the assessee. The aforesaid facts, in my considered view, does not render the order infirm on account of any jurisdictional error. If tax has escaped assessment due to concealment, the proper recourse is to reopen the assessment under section 18 of the Act. This is precisely what was attempted to be d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates