9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1975 (7) TMI 138 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax
Issues: Jurisdiction of revising authority to entertain grounds not in dispute before appellate authority.
In this case, the revising authority sought the opinion of the High Court on whether it was permissible for them to entertain a ground regarding the rate of tax on dhoop batti, which was not in dispute before the appellate authority. The department raised the issue of the rate of tax for the first time before the revising authority, seeking an enhancement from 2% to 7% based on a Supreme Court judgment. The revising authority accepted this request, leading to the current dispute. The High Court analyzed the jurisdiction of the revising authority in such matters. It was noted that the rate of tax on dhoop batti was not contested before the Sales Tax Officer or the appellate authority. The revising authority, in this case, exceeded its jurisdiction by entertaining a ground that was not part of the appeal before the appellate authority. The High Court emphasized that the revising authority does not have the power of enhancement, unlike the appellate authority. The revising authority's jurisdiction is limited to examining the legality and propriety of orders passed by lower authorities, without the power to enhance tax liability. The High Court referred to a Supreme Court judgment regarding the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, emphasizing that the jurisdiction of such authorities is restricted to the subject matter of the appeal. The revising authority's power is akin to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and it does not include the power of enhancement. The High Court also cited a previous judgment by the same court, reinforcing the principle that the revising authority cannot enhance tax rates beyond what was originally assessed. Ultimately, the High Court answered the question in the negative, ruling in favor of the assessee and against the department. The assessee was awarded costs amounting to Rs. 100. The reference was thus answered in favor of the assessee, highlighting the importance of jurisdictional limits for revising authorities in tax matters.
|
