1973 (3) TMI 119 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Jurisdiction of the judge (Revisions) to entertain a revision against the issue of notice under section 15-A(c) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act by the Sales Tax Officer.

Detailed Analysis:

The judgment delivered by the High Court of Allahabad addressed the issue of whether the judge (Revisions) had the jurisdiction to entertain a revision against the issuance of a notice under section 15-A(c) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act by the Sales Tax Officer. The case involved an assessee who was assessed to tax for the year 1966-67 under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The assessee filed an appeal against the assessment order and requested the Judge (Revisions) for a stay on the realization of tax during the appeal. Despite the stay order, the Sales Tax Officer issued a notice under section 15-A(c) of the Act for non-payment of tax, leading the assessee to apply for revision to the judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, against the notice. The judge (Revisions) quashed the notice after rejecting the objection of the department regarding the maintainability of the revision.

The court examined the provisions of section 15-A of the Act, which deals with penalties, specifically clause (c) allowing the assessing authority to impose a penalty for failure to pay tax without reasonable cause. The court noted that a notice must be issued before imposing a penalty, as per the proviso attached to this section. The notice in question called upon the assessee to show cause for non-payment of tax and warned of ex parte proceedings if the notice was not complied with. The central issue was whether a revision could be entertained against such a notice.

Analyzing the relevant statutory provision, the court referred to section 10 of the Act, which confers the power of revision upon a revising authority. Sub-section (3) of this section outlines the authority's discretion to examine and pass orders on the legality or propriety of any order made by appellate or assessing authorities. The court emphasized that a show cause notice under section 15-A is not an order but merely an intimation, distinguishing it from a command issued through an order. The court clarified that the revising authority's jurisdiction extends to revising orders, and a notice does not fall under this purview. The revising authority can only intervene at the stage of passing a final order imposing a penalty, not during the issuance of a show cause notice.

Concluding the analysis, the court held that the revising authority's powers are limited to revising orders and do not extend to intervening in proceedings before inferior officers unless authorized by statute. As the notice in question was not an order, the revising authority lacked jurisdiction to entertain a revision against it. The court answered the question in the negative, ruling in favor of the department and against the assessee. The judgment highlighted the distinction between a notice and an order, emphasizing that only the final order imposing a penalty could be subject to revision.