1991 (8) TMI 24 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of Joint Commissioner u/s 35 for periods prior to March 31, 1982
2. Conflict between Karnataka Act 14 of 1983 and Karnataka Act 23 of 1985
3. Applicability of the Explanation added to Section 35
4. Limitation period for exercising revisional power

Summary:

Jurisdiction of Joint Commissioner u/s 35 for periods prior to March 31, 1982:
The petitioners challenged the notices issued u/s 35 of the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, arguing that the Joint Commissioner could not revise orders for assessment years prior to the accounting year ending on March 31, 1982. They contended that the Joint Commissioner was empowered by Karnataka Act 14 of 1983, which should be confined to periods stated therein.

Conflict between Karnataka Act 14 of 1983 and Karnataka Act 23 of 1985:
The petitioners argued that the enlargement of the Joint Commissioner's jurisdiction by Karnataka Act 23 of 1985 conflicted with Section 2 of the earlier Amendment Act (Karnataka Act 14 of 1983). They asserted that the Explanation added by the 1985 Act should be harmonized with the 1983 Act, restricting the Joint Commissioner's power to periods after March 31, 1982.

Applicability of the Explanation added to Section 35:
The court examined whether the Explanation added to Section 35 by Karnataka Act 23 of 1985 allowed the Joint Commissioner to revise orders for periods before March 31, 1982. The Explanation stated that the revisional power conferred on the Joint Commissioner shall be exercisable in respect of any order passed before or after the conferment of revisional power on him. The court concluded that the Explanation empowered the Joint Commissioner to revise any order, subject to the limitation period in Section 35(2).

Limitation period for exercising revisional power:
The court noted that the petitioners could raise the issue of limitation before the Joint Commissioner. The notices issued by the Joint Commissioner were challenged on the grounds of being beyond the four-year limitation period. The court allowed the petitioners to show cause within six weeks and directed the respondent to consider all questions, including limitation, in accordance with the law.

Conclusion:
The court dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the Joint Commissioner could exercise revisional power for periods prior to March 31, 1982, as per the Explanation added to Section 35 by Karnataka Act 23 of 1985, subject to the limitation period. The petitioners were allowed to raise the issue of limitation before the Joint Commissioner.