2006 (3) TMI 712 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether sales tax authorities can exercise revision power when an appeal is pending before the State Sales Tax Tribunal.

Detailed Analysis:
The main issue in this judgment revolves around the question of whether the sales tax authorities have the jurisdiction to exercise the power of revision while an appeal is pending before the State Sales Tax Tribunal. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners argued that this issue has already been settled by a Full Bench of the court in a previous case. The Full Bench interpreted section 20(2-A) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, emphasizing that the Appellate Tribunal holds superiority over the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The provision creates a bar on the revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner if the issue has already been decided by the Appellate Tribunal for the same assessee, irrespective of the application of res judicata principles.

Another aspect raised during the proceedings was the concern regarding the time limitation for exercising revisional power. The learned counsel for the department highlighted that if the revisional power is not exercised within a specified period, it becomes time-barred under section 20(3) of the Act. In response, the learned Senior Counsel referred to a Supreme Court judgment stating that once a party seeks time, they cannot later claim defense based on limitation. This argument was presented to address the situation where an appeal is pending, and the revisional authority wishes to invoke its power after the prescribed time limit has expired.

In light of the arguments presented and the legal precedents cited, the court concluded that when a matter is pending before the Sales Tax Tribunal and a revision is initiated by the authority under the Act, if the assessee requests a stay on the revision until the appeal is decided, the stay should be granted. The period spent in litigation before the Tribunal should not be counted towards the limitation period under section 20(3) if the Revenue decides to initiate revision after the Tribunal's decision. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, allowing the parties to initiate revision if desired after the Tribunal's decision, and the appeals and writ petitions were disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.