1970 (10) TMI 57 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of Limitation Period for Reopening Assessment
2. Jurisdiction of Assessing Authority
3. Procedural versus Substantive Law
4. Retrospective Application of Amended Law

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Applicability of Limitation Period for Reopening Assessment:
The primary issue was whether the amended provision, sub-section (4-A) of Section 14 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, prescribing a six-year limitation period for reopening assessments, applies to the case at hand. The petitioner contended that the three-year limitation under the Madras General Sales Tax Act should apply, as the assessment year 1956-57 ended before the new Act came into force. The court concluded that the six-year period applies, as the amendment to Section 14(4) was made retrospective from 15th June 1957, and the assessment was reopened within this period.

2. Jurisdiction of Assessing Authority:
The petitioner argued that the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer lacked jurisdiction to assess the turnover since it was less than Rs. 5 lakhs, and only the Commercial Tax Officer should have jurisdiction. The court held that the assessing authority had jurisdiction to make the assessment, as the case fell under Section 14(3) of the new Act, which applied due to the retrospective effect of the amendment.

3. Procedural versus Substantive Law:
The court discussed the distinction between substantive rights and procedural rules. It emphasized that procedural laws, including limitation periods, can be altered without affecting substantive rights. The court held that the procedural change extending the limitation period to six years did not infringe upon any vested rights of the petitioner, as no one has a vested right in a procedural rule or limitation period.

4. Retrospective Application of Amended Law:
The court examined whether the retrospective application of the amended Section 14(4-A) was valid. It concluded that the retrospective application was valid, as the amendment was intended to apply from the date the new Act came into force. The court noted that the Legislature has the authority to extend limitation periods retrospectively, provided the original period had not expired before the amendment.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the revision petition, upholding the validity of the reassessment made within the six-year period prescribed by the amended Section 14(4-A) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The court emphasized that procedural laws, including amendments extending limitation periods, can be applied retrospectively, provided they do not affect substantive rights or vested interests. The assessing authority was found to have acted within its jurisdiction, and the reassessment was deemed valid and lawful.