9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1980 (5) TMI 102 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax
Issues: Validity of notice under section 21(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 by the revising authority.
The judgment of the Court addressed the validity of a notice issued under section 21(1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 by the revising authority. The appellant, a company assessed to sales tax, challenged the notice on the grounds that the revising authority was attempting to reopen the assessment based on fresh information, which was beyond its competence. The appellant argued that the power to reopen assessments based on fresh information was vested in the Assessing Authority under section 11-A of the Act, not the revising authority. The appellant relied on a Full Bench judgment to support this contention. The Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, in response, stated that the suspicion arose from variations in signatures on certain forms, leading to an enquiry that revealed discrepancies in the transactions. The learned single Judge, after considering the Full Bench judgment, concluded that the revising authority was competent to issue the notice as the revision was initiated based on suspicious features found in the record itself. Consequently, the writ petitions challenging the notice were dismissed. The appellant's counsel argued before the High Court that the revising authority could not consider fresh material to determine the impropriety or illegality of the order or proceedings, citing the Full Bench judgment. However, after reviewing the Full Bench judgment and the arguments presented, the High Court found no merit in the appeals. The Court agreed with the lower court's interpretation that the revising authority could conduct further inquiry based on the record before the Assessing Authority, as long as the new evidence was relevant to the existing turnover on record. The Court held that in this case, the revising authority's actions were based on findings from the existing record, not on new information not part of the original record. Ultimately, the High Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the lower court's decision, with no order as to costs.
|
