1977 (10) TMI 101 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Time-barred revisional order made by Deputy Commissioner under section 20 of Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act.

Analysis:
The judgment involves two revisions by different assessees questioning the time-barred revisional order made by the Deputy Commissioner under section 20 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The Deputy Commissioner revised the assessment order, levying tax at 9 1/4 per cent on disputed turnover invoking entry 15 of the schedule, contrary to the assessing authority's decision. The Tribunal set aside the Deputy Commissioner's order, stating it was beyond the prescribed time limit under section 14(4-A). The key issue is whether the Deputy Commissioner's order falls under section 14(4) or section 20(2) of the Act, determining the time limitation for the revisional order.

The Deputy Commissioner believed the original assessing authority had not assessed the turnover at the correct rate, leading to his revision under section 20. However, the Tribunal correctly held that the Deputy Commissioner was exercising the powers of the assessing authority, not the revisional jurisdiction under section 20. The Deputy Commissioner's order was based on assessing the turnover at a different rate than the original assessment, falling under clause (c) of sub-section (4) of section 14. Therefore, the Tribunal's decision that the Deputy Commissioner's order was time-barred under section 14(4-A) was upheld.

The Deputy Commissioner's attempt to reassess the turnover based on a different rate was deemed as an exercise of the assessing authority's powers, not the revisional jurisdiction under section 20. As a higher authority, the Deputy Commissioner could exercise the powers of the assessing authority, but in this case, it was not a revisional order. Consequently, the Deputy Commissioner's order dated 11th November 1975 was considered time-barred, leading to the dismissal of both revisions. The judgment emphasizes the distinction between the powers of the assessing authority and the revisional jurisdiction under the Act, highlighting the importance of adhering to the prescribed time limits for such orders.

Therefore, the revisions were dismissed, and costs were imposed on the petitioners. The judgment clarifies the interpretation of the relevant sections of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act in determining the validity of revisional orders and upholding the prescribed time limits for such actions.