Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1967 (7) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ioner for a refund under the first proviso to section 5(4) of the Act, which directs the refund of the tax paid in respect of the sale or purchase of declared goods which are subsequently sold in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. The refunds, according to the petitioner, were refused by the Commercial Tax Officer and so, he appealed to the Deputy Commissioner under section 20. When those appeals were dismissed. he appealed further to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal under section 22. That Tribunal, which was of the view that those appeals did not lie, dismissed them. There was an unsuccessful endeavour by the petitioner to have the orders of the Tribunal reviewed, and so these two revision petitions, in which he called in questio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l under section 20 or suo motu under sub-section (1) of section 21, may, if the assessee has not preferred an application for revision of the order under sub-section (2) of section 21, appeal to the Appellate Tribunal within sixty days from the date on which the order was communicated to the assessee." Since the petitioner made no application for the revision of the orders made by the Deputy Commissioner, his appeals to the Appellate Tribunal would be within this sub-section, if the order made by the Deputy Commissioner has the status of an order "relating to assessment". The question whether it has, depends partly on the interpretation to be placed on the provisions of section 20, as it stood then, under sub-section (1) of which an appea .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... charging section, and what is accomplished by that proviso is a suitable modification of the assessment through a refund which is directed by it. Section 12 prescribes the manner of assessment and sub-section (2) of that section authorises the assessing authority to make an assessment on the basis of the return submitted by the dealer if he is satisfied that it is correct and complete. Sub-section (3) authorises an assessment to the best of his judgment, if the dealer does not submit a return or submits one which is incorrect or incomplete. Section 20 authorises an appeal from an assessment so made whether it is made under sub-section (2) or subsection (3) of section 12. So, it would be seen that when an assessment is made under subsectio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oses. Similarly, the refusal of a refund, which involves an adjudication as to the applicability of the proviso which directs a refund, on a principle which at that stage, in effect, governs incidence is one further step in the assessment and so a part of it within the meaning of section 12. That this is the true meaning to be given to the provisions of sections 20 and 22 of the Act as they stood before their amendment, becomes clear from the amendment made to those two sections by which an appeal could now be preferred under section 20 from any order under the Act by which the appellant is affected, and an appeal under section 22 from any order passed by the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner under sections 20 and 21. The sect .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t speak of a claim for any refund and there is no discussion of any such claim. But in the order made by the Deputy Commissioner in the appeals preferred by the petitioner under section 20, there is a discussion of that claim. Mr. Shantharaju, the learned Government Pleader, submitted that the applications for refund were presented only in February, 1963, and that those applications were available in the file. So, he submitted that no orders could have been made by the Commercial Tax Officer on those applications on 23rd April, 1962, when he made the final assessment. But, with this aspect of the matter, we have no concern in these revision petitions. The Deputy Commissioner did discuss in his appeal the sustainability of the claim for a re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates