2016 (1) TMI 278 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Validity of assessment order - Bar of limitation - Held that - Extended period of limitation up to six months is given from the date of receipt by the assessing authority of the order vacating the stay. - proviso to Section 21(6) of the Act clearly indicates that the period of limitation starts from the date of the receipt of the order by the assessing authority and not from the date of knowledge of the order. This is apparently clear from the plain and explicit language provided in the proviso to Section 21(6) of the Act. Similar view was held by this Court in Sri Cement Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2013 (6) TMI 197 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT . - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to a condition regarding tax exemption for inter-state trade and commerce.
2. Jurisdiction of assessment order under the Central Sales Tax Act.
3. Interpretation of Section 21(6) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act regarding limitation period.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged a condition in a notification issued by the State Government regarding tax exemption for inter-state trade and commerce. The condition required furnishing a Form-C certificate. The petitioner filed a writ petition in 1983, which was dismissed in 1997, leading to assessment proceedings initiated in 2012. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was jurisdictionally barred due to limitation.

2. The assessment order under Section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act was challenged by the petitioner for being without jurisdiction due to limitation. Section 21(6) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act deals with the period of limitation in cases where assessment proceedings are stayed by a court order. The provision allows for exclusion of the period from the date of stay order to the date of receipt of the order vacating the stay, with a provision for a maximum extension of six months.

3. The Court analyzed the interpretation of Section 21(6) and the proviso therein. It was held that the period of limitation starts from the date of receipt of the order by the assessing authority, not from the date of knowledge of the order. Citing a previous judgment, the Court emphasized that the language of the proviso is explicit in indicating the starting point for the limitation period. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's argument regarding the commencement of the limitation period.

This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the issues related to the challenge of a tax exemption condition, jurisdiction of the assessment order, and the interpretation of the limitation period under the U.P. Trade Tax Act.