1994 (10) TMI 270 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Limitation period for revising assessment under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a revision under section 22(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, filed by the State against an order passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The issue at hand is whether the Deputy Commissioner's order revising the assessment, which was passed by the assessing authority, falls within the limitation period. The assessing authority had allowed exemptions under "lorry advances" and "collections under section 8-A of the Central Act" for the assessment year 1975-76 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The Deputy Commissioner proposed to withdraw these exemptions and issued a show cause notice in 1978. The order withdrawing the exemptions was passed in 1984 after seven years from the original assessment order.

The State Act provides that the power to revise an order may be exercised within a prescribed period not exceeding four years from the date the order was served on the dealer. The rules also prescribe a four-year period for the exercise of revisional powers. The Deputy Commissioner's order was sought to be justified under section 24-A of the State Act, which deals with limitation in certain cases of assessment and reassessment. However, it was found that the Deputy Commissioner's order did not fall under the purview of section 24-A as it was not passed to give effect to any specific provisions mentioned therein.

Another provision considered was sub-section (6) of section 20 of the State Act, which applies when proceedings are deferred due to a stay order granted by the High Court or if an appeal is pending before the High Court or Supreme Court involving a relevant question of law. In this case, none of these situations applied, rendering sub-section (6) inapplicable to save the limitation.

Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that since none of the provisions saving the limitation applied, the Deputy Commissioner's order revising the assessment was clearly barred by limitation. The High Court upheld this finding, stating that there was no illegality in the Tribunal's order. Consequently, the tax revision case was dismissed without costs.