2015 (11) TMI 938 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Review Petition - Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessment orders were not barred by jurisdiction having been issued by authority not authorised thereto and were not barred by limitation having been passed beyond the statutory time-limit prescribed thereunder - Held that - The essential challenge is of the concerned authority having extended the same not having the power in wake of absence of proviso to sub-section (2) of section 42 of the Act for a limited period from April 1, 1994 to August 1, 1998. On March 22, 1994, the order of delegation gave the powers under sub-section (1) to section 42 of the Act to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax. It is explained by the respondent that no notification delegating the power under section 42 of the Act was passed after the reintroduction of the proviso to section 42 of the Act with effect from August 1, 1998 and the earlier notification dated March 22, 1994 continued to be in operation in respect of delegation of power. Such powers were delegated to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax by a subsequent notification dated May 26, 2004 where designation of Assistant Commissioner was substituted by Deputy Commissioner and those powers which were enjoyed by Assistant Commissioner were given to the Deputy Commissioner. - in wake of the substantive power authorizing the State Government or the Commissioner to extend the period of limitation for carrying out the assessment as prescribed under the proviso to section 42(2) of the Act coupled with the specific consent having been expressed in writing and communicated to the concerned authority by the petitioner, the subsequent challenge seeking to review the order needs to fail. - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Extension of time for passing assessment order beyond statutory limit.

Analysis:
The applicant sought review of a judgment dismissing their appeal challenging an order passed by the Tribunal. The applicant contended that the court had overlooked issues related to the extension of time for assessment order beyond the statutory limit. The Commercial Tax Officer, in response, argued that the contentions were not raised during the original appeal and that the order was dictated in open court without any objections. The Officer also highlighted that the original extension order was passed on March 31, 2006, with oral consent from the applicant. Another affidavit emphasized that the order was dispatched on the same day and not on April 15, 2006 as claimed by the applicant.

The Tribunal and the High Court examined the issue of extension of time for assessment order. The Tribunal considered the legality of the extension order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing that the appellant had given consent for the extension of time, which was extended by the Joint Commissioner of Sales Tax. The Court ruled in favor of the Revenue on this matter.

The respondent argued that the powers delegated to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax under a 1994 notification continued to be in effect even after the reintroduction of the proviso to Section 42 of the Act in 1998. The respondent explained that subsequent notifications in 2004 substituted the designation to Deputy Commissioner, and the powers remained with the Deputy Commissioner. The Court found that the extension order in question was passed by the Deputy Commissioner, thereby dismissing the challenge raised by the appellant.

In conclusion, the Court held that the challenge to the extension order failed as the State Government or Commissioner had the authority to extend the assessment period, and the applicant had given written consent for the extension. The Court found no grounds for review, emphasizing the clear sequence of events and the legal validity of the extension order. Consequently, the application for review was dismissed in its entirety.