9911796707
TMI Blog1960 (10) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecause the period of limitation prescribed in that behalf had expired. - Civil Appeal No. 196 of 1958, - - - Dated:- 18-10-1960 - DAS S.K., HIDAYATULLAH M., DAS GUPTA K.C., SHAH J.C. AND RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR N. JJ. Sukumar Mitter, Senior Advocate, (Sukumar Ghose, Advocate, with him), for the appellant. Veda Vyasa, Senior Advocate, (Naunit Lal Advocate, with him), for the respondents. -------------------------------------------------- The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHAH, J.- The appellants are dealers registered under the Assam Sales Tax Act XVII of 1947-hereinafter referred to as the Act. For the account period April 1, 1948, to September 30, 1948, the appellants submitted a return of their turnove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purview of the Explanation to sub-section (12) of section 2, we express no opinion." As required by section 32(8) of the Act, the Commissioner of Taxes by his order dated August 1, 1952, directed the Superintendent of Taxes to dispose of the case in accordance with the judgment of the High Court. The Superintendent of Taxes thereafter issued on January 30, 1953, the following notice to the appellants: "In view of the Hon'ble High Court's order in Sales Tax Reference No. 3 of 1951, the assessment order dated 30th September, 1950, for the return period 30th September, 1948, has been set aside and you are directed to produce necessary evidence, contract papers, account books, etc............in order to see whether the contract of sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eopen the assessment proceedings and to assess the appellants in the light of the Explanation to section 2, sub-section (12). In so doing, the Superintendent of Taxes, in our judgment, acted without authority. The Superintendent had made the assessment, and that assessment was confirmed in appeal by the Assistant Commissioner. On the questions arising out of that assessment, the High Court had opined that the transactions sought to be assessed were not liable to tax. The Superintendent of Taxes, on this opinion was right in vacating the order of assessment. But any further proceeding for assessment which he sought to commence by issuing a notice requiring the appellants to produce evidence, contract papers, account books etc. so as to enabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay proceed to assess or reassess the dealer in respect of such period. But the Commissioner had not issued any such notice under section 19-A. Nor had the Commissioner in exercise of his revisional authority under section 31 of the Act set aside the original order of assessment. The Commissioner merely directed under section 32, sub-section (8), that the case be disposed of in accordance with the judgment of the High Court, and acting under that direction, the Superintendent of Taxes had no power to reopen the assessment and to call upon the appellants to produce documentary evidence with a view to commence an enquiry whether the sales involved in the case fell "within the purview of the Explanation to section 2, sub-section (12)". In any e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Income-tax Officer required the resident company as agent of the foreign company to produce or cause to be produced books of account for the year of assessment and also to produce such other evidence on which it might seek to rely in respect of its return, and the resident company having failed to produce the books of the foreign company, he proceed- ed to make an assessment under section 23(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. By its petition under section 45 of the Specific Relief Act filed in the High Court at Bombay, the resident company prayed for an order for refund of the taxes already paid under the original assessment, and for an order for disposal of certain proceedings initiated by it before the Assistant Commissioner and the In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the exercise of his jurisdiction existed, proceed to reassess the appellants. But the proceedings for reassessment were clearly barred because the period prescribed for reassessment had expired. The Superintendent therefore had no power to issue a notice calling upon the appellants to produce evidence to enable him to start an enquiry which was barred by the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed by the Act. In the Bombay Trust Corporation case (1936) L.R. 63 I.A. 408; 4 I.T.R. 323., the Income-tax Officer acted in pursuance of the direction of the Commissioner lawfully given in exercise of revisional authority and reopened the assessment. In the present case, no such direction has been given by an authority competent in that beh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
