2016 (8) TMI 298 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Revision of assessment after 5 years - period of limitation - section 40 r.w.s. 28 & 31 of HVAT - whether the period as provided under the Act is the outer limit for conclusion of revisional proceedings or for initiation thereof. It has to be read in the manner which gives it a true meaning for the reason that an assessee can always delay the proceedings and as a result of which the process initiated will be frustrated. Held that - Plain reading of the language suggest that no order shall be revised after the expiry of a period of five years from the date of order. The only meaning which can be assigned to the language used is that the proceedings have to conclude with the passing of the order. It is not merely initiation of proceedings for revision. Second proviso to Section 40(1) of the Act enlarges the limitation, if the revision is a result of any decision of the Tribunal or Court. The proceedings initiated for revision of the orders of assessment having not concluded within the period of five years from the date of order sought to be revised, as envisaged under Section 40 of the Act, the Revisional Authority now does not have any jurisdiction to pass the order writ petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Impugning notices under Section 40 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 for assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97 for suo-moto revision of assessment.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the notices issued for revision of assessment beyond the limitation period of five years from the date of the original order. The State argued that the limitation period should be interpreted as the outer limit for initiating proceedings, not concluding them. The petitioner relied on the language of Section 40 of the Act, emphasizing that no order shall be revised after the expiry of the five-year period from the date of the original order. The petitioner cited judgments from Andhra Pradesh High Court and the Supreme Court to support their argument.

The Court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Act, including Sections 28(4), 28(5), 31, and 40. It noted that Sections 28(4) and 28(5) deal with assessment and initiation of proceedings within five years of the relevant period. Section 31 pertains to reassessment within three years from the final assessment order. In contrast, Section 40 on revision uses different language, indicating that no order shall be revised after the five-year period, implying the conclusion of proceedings. The Court highlighted the significance of the second proviso to Section 40(1) regarding the limitation period in specific circumstances.

Comparative analysis with the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act was conducted, where a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court interpreted the provisions to conclude that the exercise of revisionary powers must end within four years from the date of the order to be revised. No contradictory judgments were presented by the State's counsel.

Based on the legal analysis and interpretation of the relevant provisions, the Court found that the revision proceedings initiated against the petitioner's assessments for 1995-96 and 1996-97 had not concluded within the five-year limitation period. Consequently, the Revisional Authority lacked jurisdiction to pass the order, leading to the quashing of the impugned notices dated 22.1.2007.

In conclusion, the Court allowed the writ petition, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the statutory limitation periods for revisionary proceedings and ensuring the proper interpretation of legal provisions governing such matters.