1967 (3) TMI 90 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against order of Special Commercial Tax Officer
2. Delay in filing appeal
3. Rejection of appeal by appellate authority
4. Interpretation of section 21(6) of Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a dealer in paddy and rice, filed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the Special Commercial Tax Officer regarding the assessment of additional tax. The petitioner appealed to the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Guntur, against the revised assessment. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, seeking a stay of tax collection. The Tribunal refused to admit the appeal due to non-payment of the disputed tax, leading to finalization of the assessment and initiation of penalty proceedings by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer.

2. The petitioner's appeal before the Assistant Commissioner was rejected as it was filed out of time. Despite attempts to condone the delay, the appellate authority refused, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal. The petitioner then appealed to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, but the appeal was not admitted due to non-payment of the disputed tax. The petitioner's subsequent writ petition sought to quash the original assessment order and stay recovery of tax and penalty pending the resolution of the writ petition.

3. The petitioner's counsel argued that the rejection of the appeal by the Tribunal was erroneous as the tax amount had not been determined by the appellate authority, a prerequisite under section 21(6) of the Act for admission of appeal. Citing a previous judgment, the counsel contended that the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred did not amount to a determination of tax on merits. However, the Court disagreed, holding that the rejection of the appeal by the Assistant Commissioner constituted an appellate order confirming the original tax determination, necessitating payment of tax for appeal registration.

4. The Court relied on a Supreme Court ruling to establish that the rejection of an appeal as time-barred constitutes an appellate order confirming the original tax determination. Therefore, the provisions of section 21(6) of the Act, requiring proof of tax payment for appeal admission, applied even in cases of appeals dismissed on grounds of limitation. The Court dismissed the writ petition, affirming the necessity of paying the tax for appeal consideration before the Tribunal. Subsequently, the Court granted one month's time for payment to enable appeal registration by the Tribunal.