9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (8) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts and circumstances of the case, the conclusion of the Tribunal that objection regarding limitation not having been raised before the Assessing Authority could not be raised before it is legally valid and whether the Tribunal was justified in invoking the provisions of section 11-A of the Act?" The facts giving rise to this case may briefly be stated as under: The assessee is a karyana dealer registered under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act. For the assessment year 1964-65, the assessee filed two quarterly returns under section 10(4) of the Act. It appears that no return was filed for the first as well as the last quarter relating to that year. The Assessing Authority served a notice in form S.T. XIV on the assessee in response ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. The appellants did not raise any objection before the Assessing Authority to the effect that assessment proceedings for any of the quarters had become time-barred. This objection was not taken up in the grounds of appeal before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner. If an objection to this effect had been taken before the Assessing Authority, it would have been possible for the said authority to go into the merits of the objections now raised by the appellants. The Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner was also justified in not going into the point since it was not raised in the memorandum of appeal." At the request of the assessee, the Tribunal has made this reference to us. After h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... beyond a period of five years which is the period of limitation fixed by section 11(4) of the Act for making the best judgment assessment. We, therefore, partially answer question No. (1) in favour of the assessee and hold that proceedings relating to the first quarter ending on 30th June, 1964, were barred by time. It is no doubt true that the question of limitation was not raised by the assessee either before the Assessing Authority or before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, who heard the first appeal, but it is well-settled that question of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact. If there are necessary facts from which the inference can be drawn that a particular cause has been instituted beyond the period of limit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amalaksha ChaudhuryA.I.R. (36) 1949 P.C. 239., Sir John Beaumont, speaking for the Board, observed as under: "There have been a very large number of decisions of Indian High Courts on section 115, to many of which their Lordships have referred. Some of such decisions prompt the observation that High Courts have not always appreciated that although error in a decision of a subordinate court does not by itself involve that the subordinate court has acted illegally or with material irregularity so as to justify interference in revision under sub-section (c), nevertheless, if the erroneous decision results in the subordinate court exercising a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or failing to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, a case for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
