9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reinafter referred to as the "assessee") is a Company engaged in business of manufacturing and sale of Nylon Polyester and Zip Fasteners. Being a new unit, it claimed exemption under Section 4-A of Act, 1948 for a period of five years commencing from 04.09.1989, the date of first sale. According to assessee, date of production was 01.09.1989. The exemption application was rejected by Divisional Level Committee, Meerut vide order dated 10.03.1992. 5. The assessee preferred revision under Rule 25(3)(c) of U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules, 1948") vide application dated 26.03.1992 which remained pending till October, 1993. In the meantime Assessing Authority endeavored to complete assessment for assessment years 1989-90 to 1992-93 under Act, 1948 as also under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1956"). The assessee faced with this situation, approached this Court in Writ Petition No. Nil of 1993, which was finally disposed of on 15.10.1993 with following order: "The short prayer of the petitioner is that it made a review application on 26.3.93 against the order dated 10.3.92 rejecting the application for issuing an eligi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llenged by Commissioner, Trade Tax in Trade Tax Revision No. 52 of 1998 to the extent it had allowed and granted relief to assessee. 11. To the extent relief was not granted to assessee, i.e., instead of 04.09.1989, the Tribunal allowed exemption fron 05.09.1990, the assessee challenged the same in Writ Petition No. 799 (M/S) of 1998. 12. The Court in Writ Petition No. 799 (M/S) of 1998 declined to grant any interim relief but passed interim order dated 11.05.1998 in Trade Tax Revision No. 52 of 1998, staying Tribunal's order dated 20.12.1997. 13. For assessment years in dispute Assessing Authority passed ex parte order of assessment dated 30.03.1998 imposing tax relying on Tribunal's order dated 20.12.1997 and treating exemption effective only from 05.09.1990. Thereagainst, assessee preferred First Appeals No. 1167/98, 1168/98, 1169/98 and 1179/98 on the ground that ex parte assessment order is barred by time but the same were dismissed by First Appellate Authority, i.e., Deputy Commissioner (Appeal)-Second, Trade Tax, Meerut and assessee's Second Appeals No. 92/2001, 93/2001, 94/2001 and 95/2001 have also been dismissed by Tribunal vide order dated 30.05.2001. 14. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment for the assessment year 1989-90 may be made by March 31st 1995." 19. Next amendment came to be made by U.P. Act No. 11 of 1997, w.e.f. 08.08.1997 and Section 21(2) then reads as under: "21(2). Except as otherwise provided in this Section, no order of assessment or reassessment, under any provision of this Act for any assessment year shall be made after expiration of two years from the end of such year or March 31st 1998 whichever is later." 20. For the purpose of assessment year 1989-90 and 1990-91 no other amendment has been brought to the notice of this Court so as to have any consequence in the cases in hand. 21. The simple argument advanced by Sri Kunwar Saxena, learned counsel for the revisionist, is that assessment orders, in all these four cases, have been passed on 30.03.1998 though limitation to pass the same expired on 31.03.1996 in view of Section 21(2) of Act, 1948, as it stood after amendment by U.P. Act No. 31 of 1995. Once limitation expired, there was no question of treating assessment proceedings pending so as to take advantage of amendment made by U.P. Act No. 11 of 1997 and, therefore, assessment orders passed on 30.03.1998 cannot be held to be valid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arned counsel for revisionist, if considered only in the light of U.P. Act No. 31 of 1995, it cannot be doubted that assessment made for the year 1989-90 on 30.3.1998 is apparently barred by time, but then I have the benefit of a further U.P. amendment by U.P. Act No. 11 of 1997 which has substituted entire Sub-Section (2) of Section 21 and provides that an order of assessment or re-assessment under any provision of the Act of any Assessment Year can be made after expiry of two years from the end of such year or 31.3.1998, "whichever is later". The Legislature has drafted Sub-section (2) this time so as to exclude the necessity of proviso inasmuch in all the matters, where limitation would have expired otherwise, the same has been permitted to be made upto 31.3.1998. 28. The difference between Sub-section (2) of Section 21 as came to be substituted by U.P. Act No. 31 of 1995 and 11 of 1997 is that the former provides a general limitation of three years or 31.3.1996, but for the Assessment Year 1989-90, it provides limitation upto 31.3.1995. So long as this proviso was available in the Statute, an order of assessment, if not already passed upto 31.3.1995 in respect of Assessment Ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
