1982 (11) TMI 156 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Proceedings under sales tax law, appeal provision under repealed Punjab Act retained in Haryana Act, non-compliance with deposit requirement for appeal, interpretation of proviso to section 65 of Haryana Act, right of appeal vs. procedure for appeal.

Analysis:
The case involves proceedings under sales tax law for the assessment year 1972-73, transitioning from the repealed Punjab General Sales Tax Act to the Haryana General Sales Tax Act. The Haryana Act retained the appeal provision from the Punjab Act but introduced a new requirement for appeal consideration - payment of assessed tax and penalties under section 39(5) within sixty days of the order appealed against. An ex parte assessment was made against the petitioner-firm, leading to appeals dismissed by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner and the Sales Tax Tribunal due to non-compliance with the deposit requirement.

The key argument raised was that the petitioner's appeal should be governed by the provisions of the Punjab Act since the assessment pertained to a period before the Haryana Act came into force. The petitioner contended that the right of appeal was saved by the proviso to section 65 of the Haryana Act, which preserved rights acquired under the repealed Act. The petitioner argued that the deposit condition under the Haryana Act unduly restricted the right of appeal, contrary to the saving provision in the proviso.

The court rejected the petitioner's argument, emphasizing that a right of appeal is a statutory creation and subject to legislative regulation. Citing precedent, the court clarified that the legislature can impose conditions or restrictions on the exercise of the right of appeal, including requirements like depositing tax or penalties before appeal consideration. Referring to a Division Bench ruling and a Supreme Court case, the court highlighted that amendments to appeal provisions can apply retroactively to assessments from earlier periods. Consequently, the court upheld the Sales Tax Tribunal's decision that the appeal could not be entertained due to non-compliance with section 39(5) of the Haryana Act.

In conclusion, the court found no fault with the Sales Tax Tribunal's decision and dismissed the petition with costs, affirming the validity of the deposit requirement for appeal consideration under the Haryana Act. The judgment underscores the legislative authority to regulate the right of appeal and impose conditions on its exercise, even retroactively affecting assessments from prior periods.