9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the return. On 24.3.2017, received assessment orders from the 2nd respondent for the year 2009-10 and 2010-11, Exts.P3 and P4. As per the averments, 2nd respondent issued notices under Section 25(1) read with Section 42(2) (b) dated 22.2.2017 through e-mail to the e-mail ID of the petitioner, which was served on 25.2.2017 and an opportunity for personnel hearing was granted for 10.3.2017. Petitioner appeared before the 2nd respondent on 9.3.2017 and sought explanation with respect to the Audit Report for the year 2011-12. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the proceedings for the assessment under Section 25(1) were initiated after the period of limitation provided ie., 5 years as the amendment in 2017 increasing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Court for dismissal of the writ petition. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book. The time limit prescribed vide amendment was, from five years, extended to six years as per the amendment brought in 2017 in v the judgment in Baiju A.A & Others v. State Tax Officer (2020 (1) KHC 39). In view of the judgment, the amendment, extendimg period of limitation has been held to be prospective in nature and Assessment proceedings ,initiated after expiry of 5 years, were held to be beyond limitation. The question which is to be seen by this Court is that the amendment of Section 42 brought vide notification dated 13.11.2016 having a retrospective effect, whether period of limitation as provided in Section 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pletion of any other provisions under the Act connected with such assessment appeal or revision, whichever is later. Fixing of a reasonable period would have to be read in deterimining what reasonable should be. The oral scheme of KVAT Act in the interest of ensuring certainity in tax matters and also the necessity to interpret the provisions in the manner is to avoid unconstitutional results such as unreasonablness, unfairness and arbitrariness of statutory provisions. For the purpose of determining limits of the exercise of powers, Section 42(3) is reproduced herein below: "3. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, if a dealer, (i) fails to file audited accounts referred to in sub-section (1), or (ii) fails to fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
