9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice seeks to carry out assessment of the petitioner for the period from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017. He submits that the period of assessment is four years, which was extended to six years by the Telangana Value Added Tax (Second Amendment) Act, 2017 (Act 26 of 2017). 4. This enactment was struck down by this Court as being unconstitutional vide judgment dated 05.07.2022 in W.P.No.7893 of 2020 and batch (M/s. Sri Sri Engineering Works v. Deputy Commissioner (CT)). 5. Relevant portion of the judgment of this Court in M/s. Sri Sri Engineering Works v. Deputy Commissioner (CT) (supra) reads as follows: "As noticed above, the Ordinance was promulgated by the Governor on 17. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontinued under the amended Acts or repealed Acts. Therefore, it was considered necessary to strengthen certain provisions of the VAT Act to overcome any limitations to help effective revenue realization. Therefore, it was decided to amend certain provisions of the VAT Act by undertaking a legislation. Since it was decided to give effect to such decision immediately and as the Legislature of Telangana was not in session, therefore, the Governor, in exercise of powers conferred by Clause (1) of Article 213 of the Constitution promulgated the Ordinance which basically extended the limitation from four years to six years in respect of assessments, reassessments, revision etc. It is not necessary for us to go into the aspect as to whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... With effect from 16.09.2016 the Constitution was amended by virtue of the Constitution Amendment Act. While Article 246A was inserted immediately after Article 246, the earlier Entry 54 of List II was substituted by the new Entry 54, in the process denuding the States from making any law except on the sale of petroleum crude, high speed diesel, motor spirit (petrol), natural gas, aviation turbine fuel and alcoholic liquor for human consumption. Thus the States did not have the competence to make law to levy VAT or such tax on any goods other than the above goods. Section 19 of the Constitution Amendment Act, which can be construed to be a sunset clause, provided for a window of one year to remove the laws inconsistent with the Constitut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operation, its competence to make a law for a certain past period would, however, depend on its present legislative power and not on what it possessed at the period of time when the enactment would be in operation. Insofar the decisions relied upon by the learned Advocate General are concerned, we have already discussed why those would not be applicable to the facts and grounds of challenge made in this bunch of writ petitions. Finally we may also look into the intention of the Parliament in enacting the Constitution Amendment Act. This is because it would give us a clear idea as to why the Constitution Amendment Act was brought about and why the Second Amendment Act cannot be sustained being completely inconsistent with the scheme of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was earlier. When the State Legislature repealed the KVAT Act, while simultaneously bringing into force the new State GST Act, with a savings clause of limited operation, it effectively acknowledged the absence of any power to legislate thereafter on the subject of tax on sale or purchase of goods, except in respect of the limited commodities for which the said power was retained under the Constitution. In respect of all other commodities, the legislative power of the State was only in respect of taxes on the supply of goods or services or both, a power that had to be exercised simultaneously with the Parliament and not unilaterally or exclusively. Thus, at the time of repeal of the KVAT Act, and simultaneous enactment of the State GST Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. From a perusal of the impugned notice dated 21.06.2023, we find that the said notice is clearly beyond the limitation period of four years from the end of the assessment period. Evidently, respondent No.4 has invoked the extended period of limitation of six years provided by Act 26 of 2017 though not specifically mentioned in the impugned notice. When this provision has been declared unconstitutional by this Court, we are at a loss as to why respondent No.4 had issued the impugned notice based on such a provision. 7. In view of above and following the judgment of this Court in M/s. Sri Sri Engineering Works v. Deputy Commissioner (CT) (supra), impugned notice dated 21.06.2023 issued by respondent No.4 is hereby set aside. 8. Writ Petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
