2004 (11) TMI 588 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.
2. Applicability of the limitation period under sub-section (4) of Section 21.
3. Jurisdiction of the Trade Tax Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings after the expiry of the prescribed period.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948:
The petitioner challenged the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Trade Tax Officer under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, arguing that the reassessment proceedings were initiated beyond the prescribed period of limitation. The court examined whether the reassessment proceedings could be validly initiated under sub-section (2) of Section 21 when sub-section (4) of the same section was applicable.

2. Applicability of the limitation period under sub-section (4) of Section 21:
The petitioner contended that under sub-section (4) of Section 21, a fresh assessment order must be passed within one year from the date of receipt of the remand order by the Assessing Authority. Since the remand order was received on June 9, 1994, the fresh assessment should have been completed by June 8, 1995. The court noted that sub-section (4) provides a specific limitation period for making an assessment following a remand order and that this specific period prevails over the general limitation period provided in sub-section (2).

3. Jurisdiction of the Trade Tax Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings after the expiry of the prescribed period:
The court analyzed whether the Trade Tax Officer had the jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under sub-section (2) of Section 21 after the expiry of the limitation period specified under sub-section (4). The court held that sub-section (2) of Section 21, which allows reassessment within a broader timeframe, is subject to the specific provisions of sub-section (4). Therefore, once the specific limitation period under sub-section (4) expired, reassessment proceedings could not be initiated under the general provisions of sub-section (2).

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 21 were invalid as they were initiated after the expiry of the specific limitation period provided under sub-section (4). The court quashed the notice dated January 16, 2002, and the order dated January 25, 2002, issued by the Trade Tax Officer, as they were without jurisdiction. The writ petition was allowed, and the reassessment proceedings were set aside.