9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (3) TMI 116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 10 of the Amendment Act. If so read, it is clear that the assessing authorities before reassessing the dealers should afford them reasonable opportunity to satisfy them that they have not collected tax. - Civil Appeal No. 2605, 2593, 2594, 2595, 2596, 2597, 2598, 2599, 2601, 2602, of 1972 - - - Dated:- 16-3-1973 - HEGDE K.S., JAGANMOHAN REDDY P. AND KHANNA H.R. JJ. March 16, 1973 Civil Appeal No. 2605, Civil Appeal No. 2593, Civil Appeal No. 2594, Civil Appeal No. 2595, Civil Appeal No. 2596, Civil Appeal No. 2597, Civil Appeal No. 2598, Civil Appeal No. 2599, Civil Appeal No. 2601, Civil Appeal No. 2602, Civil Appeal No. 2603, Civil Appeal No. 2604, Civil Appeal No. 2609, Civil Appeal No. 2610, Civil Appeal No. 2611, Ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.K. Sen, Senior Advocate (S.S. Javali and M.Veerappa, Advocates, with him), for the appellant in C.A. No. 2593. M.C. Setalvad, Senior Advocate (K.N. Bhatt, Advocate, with him), for the respondent in C.A. No. 2698. R.N. Sachthey and S.P. Nayar, Advocates, for respondent No. 2 in C.A. Nos. 2593, 2597-2605, 2606-2608, 2609-2614, 2615-2618, 2619-2627 and 2633-2634. M. Veerappa, Advocate, for the appellants in all other appeals. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the court was delivered by HEGDE, J. -In these appeals by special leave, a common question of law arises for decision and that question relates to the scope and effect of the Central Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1969 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n intra-State sale. That provision was given retrospective effect but it was provided in section 10(1) of the Amendment Act: "Where any sale of goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce has been effected during the period between the 10th day of November, 1964, and the 9th day of June, 1969, and the dealer effecting such sale has not collected any tax under the principal Act on the ground that no such tax could have been levied or collected in respect of such sale or any portion of the turnover relating to such sale and no such tax could have been levied or collected if the amendments made in the principal Act by this Act had not been made, then, notwithstanding anything contained in section 9 or the said amendments, the dealer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the conclusion that the assessee had collected tax on the turnover which was earlier considered as exempted. The High Court accepted the first of the two aforementioned contentions, viz., that the Sales Tax Officer had no jurisdiction to reassess the assessees as it was impermissible for him to receive any additional evidence with a view to decide the question whether the assessee had collected sales tax on the turnovers in question and consequently he could not take any assistance from rule 38 of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules, 1957. Before proceeding to examine the question of law arising for decision, it is necessary to note that in all the cases before us except in one, which will be dealt with separately, we are told that the assessees ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat for finding out whether there was a mistake apparent on the record or not, it is not permissible for the Sales Tax Officer to take any evidence whatsoever as the mistake to be rectified must be apparent on the record. On that premises it held that because it is not permissible for the assessee to adduce additional evidence to show that they have not collected tax, it is not open to the assessing authorities to reopen the assessments. This approach is neither logical nor sound in law. Section 10 of the Amendment Act mitigates the rigour of the amendment made to section 6 of the principal Act. But for section 10 of the Amendment Act, every dealer would have had to pay tax on the turnovers in question whether he had collected tax or not. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
