2000 (1) TMI 963 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the assessing officer to issue notice for reopening assessment under section 12.
2. Applicability of the amended provision of section 12 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954.
3. Interpretation of section 6 of the Rajasthan General Clauses Act, 1955.
4. Impact of the principle under section 30 of the Limitation Act, 1963 on the case.

Analysis:
1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the jurisdiction of the assessing officer to issue a notice for reopening the assessment under section 12. The amendment to section 12 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 reduced the time limit from eight to five years for initiating reassessment proceedings. The assessing officer issued the notice on April 18, 1996, which was beyond the amended period. The court analyzed the provisions and concluded that the assessing officer did not have jurisdiction to initiate proceedings beyond the prescribed time limit.

2. The court delved into the applicability of the amended provision of section 12 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. It compared the unamended and amended versions of the section to determine the impact of the change in the time limit for issuing notices. The court emphasized that the assessing officer must adhere to the provisions in force at the time of exercising power, which in this case, limited the timeframe for issuing notices to five years from the end of the relevant assessment year.

3. The interpretation of section 6 of the Rajasthan General Clauses Act, 1955 was crucial in understanding the effect of the repeal of an enactment on ongoing proceedings. The court explained that while vested rights remain enforceable, there is no vested right in the procedure or manner in which a right can be enforced. The court highlighted that the law governing the procedure for enforcement must align with the existing provisions at the time of exercising the right.

4. The court also examined the impact of the principle under section 30 of the Limitation Act, 1963 on the case. It clarified that the law of limitation bars the remedy but does not extinguish the right itself. The court cited precedents to illustrate that the period of limitation applicable to a case is determined by the law in force at the time of initiating the proceedings. This principle guided the court's decision that the assessing officer lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment beyond the stipulated timeframe.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the revision petition, upholding that the assessing officer's action was not sustainable due to exceeding the prescribed time limit for issuing notices under section 12. The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to statutory provisions in effect at the time of exercising statutory powers, especially concerning the initiation of reassessment proceedings within the specified timeframe.