1974 (5) TMI 100 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues Involved
1. Jurisdiction of the Commercial Taxes Tribunal to entertain a revision under section 31(2) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959.
2. Whether the orders passed by the Commissioner under section 31(5) were revisable by the Tribunal.
3. The legality of the Tribunal's decision to set aside the Commissioner's orders and remand the cases for re-examination.
4. Whether the applications filed by the dealers were time-barred.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis

1. Jurisdiction of the Commercial Taxes Tribunal to entertain a revision under section 31(2) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959
The court examined section 31 of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959, which outlines the powers of revision by various authorities. It was noted that the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, constituted under section 34A of the Act, exercises all the powers and performs all the functions of the Board of Revenue. The court held that "no restriction has been put on the power of the revisional authority under sub-section (1), sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 31." Therefore, the Tribunal had jurisdiction to revise an order passed by the Commissioner under section 31(5).

2. Whether the orders passed by the Commissioner under section 31(5) were revisable by the Tribunal
The court analyzed the orders passed by the Commissioner in both tax cases. In Tax Case No. 62 of 1970, the Commissioner rejected the application stating, "When the avenue of appeal is available to the petitioner, I find no reason to take suo motu action. Petition rejected." In Tax Case No. 63 of 1970, the Commissioner refused to admit the application on the grounds that the dealer could not deposit the required amount for an appeal. The court concluded that these orders were indeed passed under section 31(5) and were, therefore, revisable by the Tribunal under section 31(2).

3. The legality of the Tribunal's decision to set aside the Commissioner's orders and remand the cases for re-examination
The Tribunal had set aside the orders of the Commissioner and remanded the cases for re-examination. The court supported this action, referencing several decisions, including:
- Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Madras Division v. C.M. Swamy & Co.: The Tribunal directed the Commercial Tax Officer to take up the matter suo motu in revision.
- Commissioner of Sales Tax, Bihar v. Ganesh Abhushan Bhandar: The Board of Revenue had wide revisional powers and could revise orders of subordinate authorities.
The court held that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to remand the cases for re-examination under section 31(5).

4. Whether the applications filed by the dealers were time-barred
The court rejected the contention that the applications were time-barred. It clarified that sub-section (4) of section 31, which prescribes a limitation of sixty days, governs only revisional applications filed under sub-sections (1), (2), and (3). The outer limit for taking action under sub-section (5) is four years from the date of the order. Therefore, the applications filed by the dealers were within the permissible time frame.

Conclusion
The court answered the common question in the affirmative, holding that:
1. The Commercial Taxes Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain revisions under section 31(2) of the Act.
2. The orders passed by the Commissioner under section 31(5) were revisable by the Tribunal.
3. The Tribunal could legally set aside the Commissioner's orders and remand the cases for re-examination.
4. The applications filed by the dealers were not time-barred.

The court ruled in favor of the assessees (dealers) and against the revenue, awarding costs to the assessees.

← Previous Next →