TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 714X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 84 of the TNVAT Act and revise the assessment under the CST Act. - Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed, the impugned order dated 27.6.2016 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for fresh consideration. - Writ Petition No.22537 of 2016 and WMP.No.19219 of 2016 - - - Dated:- 30-6-2016 - MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM For the Petitioner : Mr.S.Raveekumar For the Respondent : Mr.S.Manohar Sundaram, AGP ORDER Mr.S.Manohar Sundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent. Heard both. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner, which is a registered dealer on the file of the respondent under the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o Section 8(4) of the Act, on the one hand, and the proviso to Rule 12(7) of the Central Sales Tax (Registration and Turnover) Rules, on the other. The proviso in the Act simply says that the C forms shall be filed before the prescribed authority either within the prescribed time or within such further time as that authority may, for sufficient cause, permit . As a matter of construction of the proviso in the statute, if there is sufficient cause, further time will have to be allowed. The proviso to the Section does not insist that the assessee should establish before the prescribed authority that he was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the C forms in time. The sufficient cause spoken of by Parliament in Section 8(4) is sufficie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down the discretion of the authority concerned. The question, however, is which is to be the master, the proviso in the Section or the proviso in the rule ? There can be no doubt about the legal position that a rule cannot prevail against the statute, by being repugnant to the statute. A study of the structure of the proviso to Section 8(4) shows how Parliament's peculiar preferences had worked in this regard. While Parliament was content to leave to the rule-making authority, namely, the Central Government, the task of prescribing a rule laying down the time-limit for furnishing C forms, the power to allow further time, however, was not relegated to the Rules, but deliberately enacted into the very text of the provisos to Section 8(4) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there is any room for the perplexity given expression to by the learned Government Pleader. Given the assessing authority's undoubted power to allow further time for C forms to be filed on sufficient cause, the rest of it is mere procedure or follow up action. Where the assessing authority is satisfied, in a given case, about the existence of sufficient cause, it must necessarily be followed up by appropriate action, such as reopening the assessment already completed. Perhaps the requisite corrective action can be taken by invoking the assessing authority's statutory power of rectification of mistakes. Even otherwise, the implementation, in appropriate cases, of the power to allow further time cannot be withheld on the excuse that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. Therefore, the respondent has power to invoke Section 84 of the TNVAT Act and revise the assessment under the CST Act. 8. In the light of the above referred to decisions, the finding rendered by the respondent in the impugned order dated 27.6.2016 calls for interference. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed, the impugned order dated 27.6.2016 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The respondent shall accept Form I declarations given by the petitioner and thereafter proceed to pass revised orders in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 9(2) of the CST Act read with Section 84 of the Act. No costs. Consequently, the above WMP is closed. - - TaxTMI - TMI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
