9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (9) TMI 271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ltimately in this petition the main contention urged is about the jurisdiction of the Assistant Sales Tax Officer and, therefore, those matters are not relevant. Against the order passed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer dated 28th August, 1981, the petitioner preferred a revision before the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ujjain Range, on 23rd October, 1981. This revision was filed under section 39 of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act. It was contended before the Deputy Commissioner that earlier assessments were done by the Sales Tax Officer and, therefore, the Assistant Sales Tax Officer had no jurisdiction to assess the petitioner. The Deputy Commissioner by his order dated 12th November, 1982, rejected the revision petition and maintain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . It was, therefore, contended that the Assistant Sales Tax Officer had no jurisdiction to assess in the present case as the gross turnover of the preceding year was more than rupees four lakhs. Learned counsel placed reliance on the decisions in Ramnath Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh [1984] 17 VKN 173 (MP) and Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. v. Sarjoo Prasad Ram Kumar [1976] 37 STC 533 (SC); [1977] 10 VKN 49 (SC). Learned counsel also referred to the decisions in Bhagwan Devi Saraogi v. Income-tax Officer [1979] 118 ITR 906 (Cal) and Continental Commercial Corporation v. Incometax Officer [1975] 100 ITR 170 (Mad.) to contend that the question of jurisdiction is a matter which goes to the root of the matter and, therefore, could be raise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tition before this Court. 6.. Rule 68(7)(c) clearly provides: "68. Delegation of Commissioner's powers.-The Commissioner shall not delegate any powers other than those enumerated below, in respect of the section/ rules mentioned in column (2) of the Table below, nor shall he delegate any power thereunder specified in column (3) of the said Table to any officer below the rank or contrary to the conditions specified and mentioned in the corresponding entry in column (4) thereof: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ S. No. Section/rule Description of powers Designation of officer and conditions of delegation (1) (2) (3) (4) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of assessment which is in dispute in the preceding year the gross turnover was more than rupees four lakhs. Under these circumstances, it is not in dispute that the Assistant Sales Tax Officer had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order of assessment. A Division Bench decision of this Court in Ramnath Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh [1984] 17 VKN 173 considered this question and it was held: "As the question of jurisdiction of the assessing authority is a question which goes to the root of the matter, it deserves to be examined first. Clause (c) of sub-rule (7) of rule 68, as has been quoted above, provides that the ASTO will be competent to make an assessment where the taxable turnover of the year preceding the period of assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
