9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (12) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer. Feeling aggrieved by that decision, he filed a revision which was decided by the Commissioner of Sales Tax on 30th July, 1969. The learned Commissioner held that as the petitioner had no previous year, the order of assessment against him could not be passed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer and could be made only by the Sales Tax Officer. In this view, he set aside the order of assessment and penalty. He, however, remanded to the Sales Tax Officer, Gwalior Circle 2, Gwalior, the case of the petitioner for disposal according to law. 2.. While the said revision was pending, the petitioner made an application for staying the recovery proceedings. The Commissioner, by his order dated 8th May, 1968, stayed the recovery subject to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8(6) did not operate. 6.. The learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that under section 39(1) the case could not be remanded by the Commissioner to a new authority for initiating proceedings. He has further contended that the order remanding the case to the Sales Tax Officer cannot be construed as being one under section 39(1) of the Act. 7.. The question which arises for consideration on these arguments is as to whether in consequence of the direction of the Commissioner of Sales Tax to the effect that "the case has to be remanded to the Sales Tax Officer, Gwalior Circle 2, Gwalior, for disposal according to law" the Sales Tax Officer was justified in initiating the proceedings for a fresh assessment of tax and for imposition o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... An order by the Commissioner declining interference shall not be deemed to be an order prejudicial to the dealer or person." 9.. In our opinion, the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct and must be given effect to. The revision which was filed before the Commissioner was against an order made by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer. After calling for the record of the proceedings, the Commissioner could examine the legality or propriety of the said order. It was not open to him to go beyond the order or the record and to make such an order which had the effect of initiating fresh proceedings before a totally different authority. The important limitations on the exercise of his power are: (1) that he has to p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is to hold that it simply drew the attention of the Sales Tax Officer to start appropriate proceedings against the petitioner if such proceedings could be legally started. In this view also, the period provided for initiation of the proceedings under section 18(6) cannot be contravened or disregarded. 12.. As regards the claim for the refund of Rs. 7,000, we may observe that the liability of the petitioner to pay that amount arose only out of the order made by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer which has been set aside by the Commissioner. We have already held that no steps could be taken against the petitioner by the Sales Tax Officer under section 18(6) for the recovery of the amount of sales tax for the period 1st April, 1961, to 28th Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
