1992 (9) TMI 335 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Appealability of an order passed by the first appellate authority under section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act before the Sales Tax Tribunal.

Detailed Analysis:
The judgment pertains to three revisions related to assessment years 1968-69, 1969-70, and 1970-71, involving a registered partnership firm engaged in the business of foodgrains, oil-seeds, and pulses, registered under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The assessing authority rejected the firm's account books for all three years, leading to best judgment assessments. Subsequently, the first appeals filed by the firm under section 9 of the Act were accepted by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), Sales Tax. An application under section 22 of the Act for rectification of mistake was then moved by the firm, which was allowed, providing tax reliefs for the respective years. The Revenue, feeling aggrieved, appealed to the Sales Tax Tribunal against the order passed under section 22, which was allowed by the Tribunal. The firm then filed revisions against the Tribunal's decision.

The primary issue revolved around the appealability of an order passed by the first appellate authority under section 22 of the Act before the Sales Tax Tribunal. The counsel for the firm contended that no appeal lies under section 10 of the Act against such an order. The court delved into the relevant sections of the Act - 9, 10, and 11 - to interpret the legislative intent. It was noted that while the first appeal lies against orders passed by the assessing authority under section 9, the second appeal to the Sales Tax Tribunal is against orders passed by the appellate authority under section 9. The court highlighted that section 11 allows revision against orders passed under section 22, emphasizing the legislative history and amendments to provide for such revisions. Previous court decisions were cited to support the view that an order under section 22 by the first appellate authority is akin to an order passed in the appeal itself, justifying appealability before the Tribunal.

The court rejected arguments that appealed orders must have specific provisions for appeal or revision, emphasizing that the order under section 22 is essentially an order passed in the appeal process. It was underscored that denying appeal against such orders by the first appellate authority lacks logical consistency, given the nature of the rectification or review involved. The court aligned with previous decisions supporting the appealability of such orders before the Tribunal, ultimately dismissing the revisions on this ground.

In conclusion, the court upheld the Tribunal's decision to entertain and dispose of the departmental appeals, emphasizing the nature of orders under section 22 as part of the appeal process, thereby affirming the appealability of such orders before the Sales Tax Tribunal.