9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (4) TMI 993X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... els Limited v. State of Punjab ". The compendium of the facts, culminating in the commencement of, relevant for disposal of, these reference petitions filed by the petitioner-assessees, M/s. Shubh Timb Steels Ltd. and M/s. A. B. Tools Ltd. (for brevity "the assessees") and emanating from the records, is that the assessees were engaged in the business of iron and steel and were registered under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for short, "the Act"). They filed all the returns including the returns for the assessment years 1987-88, 1988-89 and 1989-90 within a stipulated period. The matter for the assessment year 1987-88 was remanded by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals). In the wake of remand, the Assessing Authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this court. In pursuance of the order dated July 16, 2004 of this court, the Tribunal referred the following question of law for opinion, vide order dated September 15, 2004: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of assessment dated April 19, 1995 is beyond limitation?" Still aggrieved by the order dated July 16, 2004 of this court, the assessees filed the appeals in the honourable Supreme Court. In the wake of order dated November 17, 2006 of the honourable apex court, the Tribunal has again referred the following questions of law for adjudication by this court: (i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the dealer is liable to pay tax under section 4B of the Punjab General Sales T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iolative of articles 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India? That is how, we are seized of the matter. At the very outset, learned counsel for the assessees submitted that as the decision of question Nos. (i), (ii), (iv) and (v) would depend upon the determination of question No. (iii), therefore, he urged that question No. (iii) be accordingly decided first. This factual position is acknowledged by the learned State counsel. Therefore, we propose to decide question No. (iii) at the first instance. In this regard, learned counsel for the assessees has argued that although no period of limitation was prescribed for deciding/passing the order of assessment during the period of relevant assessment years, but he argued that in the absence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation was prescribed for passing the assessment order during the period of relevant assessment years, but now the period of limitation of three years in this respect has been prescribed with effect from April 20, 1998 under section 11 of the Act. As indicated earlier, the Assessing Authority passed the impugned assessment orders beyond the period of more than seven years in the relevant assessment years. Thus, it would be seen that the facts of this case are neither intricate nor much disputed. Above being the position on record, now the sole question, that arises for determination, is whether the impugned assessment orders passed by the Assessing Authority beyond the period of five years are legal or not? An identical question arose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... period of 30 days from the date of expiry of each quarter. The period under the VAT Act is far shorter than the one prescribed under Sales Tax Act. We are further of the view that the sale and purchase of agricultural produce is a seasonal business which is heavily transacted during the kharif and rabi season of a year. Therefore, maximum period for assessment of market fee could reasonably be fixed at three years. 10.. When the facts of the present case are examined in the light of the aforesaid transaction, it emerges that period of three years had expired either in 1999 or the maximum in the year 2000. Therefore, no assessment could have been framed on November 26, 2001 (P3). Moreover, the assessment has been framed on vague and incomp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r may produce and such other evidence as the Assessing Authority may require on specified points, pass an order of assessment within a period of three years from the last date prescribed for furnishing the last return in respect of any period". Not only that, proviso to section 14 of the Act further posits that "the Commissioner or any person cannot direct the assessee to produce books, documents and the accounts of a period more than five years prior to the year in which assessment is made". Meaning thereby, a conjoint reading of these provisions coupled with legal proposition would reveal that the Assessing Authority has to pass an assessment order within a period of three years and no authority can direct the assessee to produce the boo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
