TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 765X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR J. The conspectus of the facts in epitome, relevant for disposal of the present revision petition and emanating from the record, is that M/s. Brahm Sarup and Sons Filling Station (hereinafter to be referred as, the old firm ) was granted registration certificate (for short, the RC ) under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for brevity the PGST Act ) and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be referred as, the CST Act ) on April 24, 1962, when it was a proprietorship concern of Brahm Sarup. The constitution of the firm was changed from proprietorship to partnership firm and Rakesh Mahindra and Abhey Kumar, sons of Brahm Sarup, were included as partners in it. Thereafter, Rakesh Mahindra and his wife Smt. Kiran Mahindra applied for the grant of new RC as partners of another petitioner-firm by the same name of M/s. Brahm Sarup and Sons (hereinafter to be referred as, the new firm ). This firm was again allotted RC on November 24, 2004 by the Assessing Authority, UT Chandigarh under the PGST and CST Acts. In the wake of repealing of the PGST Act and enforcement of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter to be referred as, the VAT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der (annexure P7) and filed the present revision petition, inter alia, raising many questions alien to the real controversy between the parties and purely based on facts. However, after going through the record, we are of the considered opinion that the following two main questions do arise for adjudication by this court: (1) Whether in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, the Revisional Authority was competent to cancel the RC of the new firm or not? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was sufficient material for cancelling the RC of the new firm by the Revisional Authority and that the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the Revisional Authority? Assailing the impugned order (annexure P7), at the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner-new firm has contended with some amount of vehemence that the Revisional Authority was not competent to cancel the RC in exercise of its powers under section 65 of the VAT Act. The argument further proceeds that even there was no cogent material before the authorities for cancellation of RC of the new firm. Thus, he prayed for acceptance of the present revision petition. In supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ither tenable nor the observations in Madan Lal Arora [1961] 12 STC 387 (SC); AIR 1961 SC 1565, Banarasi Dass [1983] 53 STC 150 (P H) and Rajendra Singh's case [1990] 79 STC 10 (Gauhati) are at all applicable and foreign to the present controversy. In Banarasi Dass Talwar's case [1983] 53 STC 150 (P H), this court concluded that the jurisdiction vested in the revising authority is confined only to the material which was before the Assessing Authority on the basis of which the original order was passed by the Assessing Authority. If subsequently fresh material has been collected or information has been received, that material or information cannot be taken into consideration for exercising powers under section 21(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. In such a case, the appropriate remedy is for initiating proceedings under section 11-A of the Act . Sequelly, in Madan Lal Arora's case [1961] 12 STC 387; AIR 1961 SC 1565, it was ruled by the honourable Supreme Court that the power to make assessment to the best of his judgment can, however, be exercised only within the three years mentioned therein and not after these three years had gone by. Likewis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certificate or cessation of liability to payment of tax under this Act . Meaning thereby, not only that, the Commissioner has the statutory power to call for the record of any proceedings, which are pending or have been disposed of by any authority subordinate to him for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality or propriety of such proceedings or order made therein and may pass such order in relation thereto as he may think fit, he has the additional power to cancel such RC under section 7(4) of the PGST Act as well. The only legal requirement as envisaged under these provisions is that no order shall be passed, which adversely affects any person unless such person has been given an opportunity of being heard . In the instant case, it is not a matter of dispute that the Revisional Authority had issued notice to the new firm, gave full opportunity of hearing and then passed a detailed order, followed by reasons, and cancelled its RC. Therefore, a combined reading of these provisions would reveal that the Revisional Authority-cum-Commissioner was competent to and rightly cancelled the RC of the new firm in this relevant behalf. Now adverting to the second conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (a) of sub-section (2) of section 5 . As per rule 3A of the PGST Rules, the application for registration under section 7 or 8 of the PGST Act shall be made to the appropriate Assessing Authority in form ST-1, containing 25 columns, requiring the applicant to furnish information, inter alia, with regard to nature of business, manufacture of goods or trade, particulars of the proprietor/partners and all other persons having any interest in the business. The proprietor or any partner or any other person having an interest in the business, has interest in no other business anywhere in India or has interest in the other businesses in India. The business in respect of which the application is made, has been registered with the Registrar of Firms and Societies, Punjab or registered in any other State/Union Territory, etc. Again, it is not a matter of dispute in the present case that the partners of the new firm did not supply the complete particulars and are guilty of concealment of material facts. The Revisional Authority has recorded a finding of fact that (i) the statutory application form is incomplete with regard to disclosure of the information regarding interest of the propr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
