TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sake even if we take three years from coming into force of the new law, the notice could have been issued only by 28.01.2009 as VAT Act came into force w.e.f. 01.04.2006 and the notice for reassessment as mentioned earlier was 14.06.2010 which again is much beyond the prescribed period under Section 22 of the VAT Act for issuance of notice of re-assessment. The notice of re-assessment issued by the respondents were beyond the period of prescribed limit. No plausible explanation has been furnished by the State Govt. justifying the delay part. Neither does the Act empower the authorities under any circumstances to proceed for re-assessment beyond the limitation period prescribed under Section 22 of the VAT Act - assessment not sustainable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the period 01.04.2001 to 31.03.2002 was done on 28.01.2005 and the tax assessed was of ₹ 10,03,45,175/-. The rate of tax for LDO has been 12 percent as per Entry-25 of Part-III of Schedule-II of the Commercial Tax Act and FO under the residuary entry being Entry-39 of Part-IV of Schedule-II of the said Act was @ 8 percent. There was no specific entry of FO under the Schedule. 4. That, on 14.06.2010 the respondent issued a notice for reassessment under Section 28 (1) of the Chhattisgarh Commercial Tax Act for assessment year, 2001-02. The petitioner filed detailed reply with preliminary objection demanding reasons as to why the said proceedings were initiated and also emphasizing the fact that under the Chhattisgarh Entry Tax Act, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he date of order of assessment and which in the instant case has not been abided with, as the notice (Annexure P/3) has been issued much after the period of three years prescribed under Section 22 of the VAT Act. Thus, the proceeding is barred by limitation. 8. In addition, counsel for the petitioner has also assailed the rate of tax applied for LDO as well as FO treating them to be one commodity. According to him, there is no specific entry for furnace oil made in Part-II or IV of Schedule-II of the Commercial Tax Act and that in the past, the said furnace oil has been treated to be one under the subsidiary entry being Entry-39 of Part-IV of Schedule-II of the Commercial Tax Act and which has not been properly taken note of by the autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date the VAT Act came into force i.e. w.e.f. 01.04.2006. Section 22 of the VAT Act refers to the repealed Act saves under the repealing provision under Section 72 of the Act which specifically holds that Chhattisgarh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 shall stand repealed from the date of coming into force of this Act. Corresponding provision of Section 28 of the Commercial Tax Act was Section 22 in the VAT Act . Under the Commercial Tax Act, the time limit within which the notice for re-assessment could be issued was within 5 calendar years from the date of order of assessment. The date of order of assessment in the present case is 28.01.2005. Thus, even under the old Act, the notice of reassessment could be issued only by 28.01.2010. However, in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 22 of the VAT Act, the time limit prescribed for issuance of notice for re-assessment is three calendar years from the date of order of assessment. As has been mentioned earlier that the order of assessment in the present case for the assessment year 2001-02 was 28.01.2005 and under the new law i.e. VAT Act, the notice for re-assessment could have been issued within three years from the date of order of assessment i.e. by 28.01.2008. For argument sake even if we take three years from coming into force of the new law, the notice could have been issued only by 28.01.2009 as VAT Act came into force w.e.f. 01.04.2006 and the notice for reassessment as mentioned earlier was 14.06.2010 which again is much beyond the prescribed period under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is submitted by the counsel for the State that the said issue stands decided by the judgment of this court in Writ Petition (T) No.08 of 2012, dated 12.06.2012 (Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax Ors). He further relied upon the decision of the Karnataka High Court in case of MRF Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Bangalore, 2011(18) STJ-204 (Kar) dealing with issue of interpretation of entries. However, the State counsel could not advance any argument so far as issue of limitation is concerned except for the fact that the said issue was not raised before the authorities below. 15. Indisputably, the law is by now well settled that legal issues and legal grounds particularly touching th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
