1962 (7) TMI 29 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Commercial Tax Officer to levy sales tax.
2. Validity of the impugned assessments made under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953.
3. Validity of the government notification removing the right to file appeals to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The jurisdiction of the Commercial Tax Officer to levy sales tax was challenged in the petitions. The Collector of Sales Tax under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 had delegated his powers to subordinate officers, including Sales Tax Officers, to make assessments. After the States Reorganisation Act, the Commissioner of Excise and Commercial Taxes for the State of Mysore was authorized to discharge the functions of the Collector. Subsequently, under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957, Commercial Tax Officers were designated to perform the functions of Sales Tax Officers. The contention that the delegation of power lapsed after the States Reorganisation Act was dismissed by the court. The court held that the notification issued by the Collector of Bombay continued in force unless modified or replaced, and the Commercial Tax Officers had jurisdiction to function under section 14 of the Act.

2. The validity of the impugned assessments made under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 was questioned. The petitioner argued that the assessments were made after the introduction of the 1957 Act but under the previous Act. The court noted that the petitioner did not appeal to the authorities under the Bombay Sales Tax Act and therefore could not challenge the assessments under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that the petitioner failed to raise the contention before the Commercial Tax Officer and dismissed the argument that the right to levy sales tax had been barred.

3. The validity of the government notification removing the right to file appeals to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal was also raised. The petitioner contended that the notification was invalid as it deprived the assessees of the right to appeal. However, the court held that since the petitioner did not appeal to the Deputy Commissioner before going to the Tribunal, the issue of the notification did not affect the petitioner directly. The court concluded that the petitions were misconceived and dismissed them with costs, upholding the jurisdiction of the Commercial Tax Officer and the validity of the impugned assessments.