9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (8) TMI 310X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70 were made on January 27, 1973, under the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter to be called "the Central Act"). In these proceedings, deductions of the amounts of sales to the extent of Rs. 64,674.85 and Rs. 83,959.85 were allowed on the ground that these sales were in the course of export. The cases were reopened under section 12 of the Rajasthan Act read with section 9 of the Central Act. In the reassessment proceedings, the assessing authority held that the said sales were not in the course of export and levied tax and interest. These matters were agitated in appeals and revisions. Even after two remands, it was ultimately held by the Commercial Tax Officer (Special Circle), Udaipur, that the aforesaid sal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ular assessments but not on reassessment, arising from the detection of escapement or evasion of tax. He also contended that the liability for the payment of interest is automatic, relying upon Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer [1981] 48 STC 466 (SC). He lastly contended that section 12 has been added in the explanation of section 11-B by the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1987, w.e.f. April 1, 1987 and it (Act No. 7 of 1987) is clarificatory in nature. 4.. In reply, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the assessee that it is well-settled law that a taxing statute is to be interpreted strictly and there is no equity or logic in interpreting it. He also contended that the Tribunal has observed in the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1987 (Rajasthan Act No. 7 of 1987), with effect from April 1, 1987. In a taxing Act one has to look merely at what it is clearly said. There is no room for any intendment. Nothing is to be read in and nothing is to be implied. The subject is not taxed unless the words of taxing statute unambiguously imposes the tax on him. If the legislature fails to express itself clearly, and tax payers escape by not being brought within the letter of law, no question of unjustness as such arises. Courts are not entitled to fill in any lacuna in any taxing Act. It has been observed in State of Punjab v. Jullundur Vegetables Syndicate [1966] 17 STC 326 (SC) at page 329; AIR 1966 SC 1295 at page 1297, para 5, as follows: "Before we advert to the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 12-Ashoka Traders v. Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer [1986] RTC 165 followed.' Similar view was taken by the Tribunal in [1988] 3 RTJS 229 and [1986] RTC 165." It has been held in Commercial Taxes Officer v. Hemraj Udhyog [1987] 64 STC 324 (Raj); [1987] 23 STL 29 (Raj) as follows: "In these circumstances, we are of the view that a particular interpretation was accepted and acted upon by the taxing authorities for a long period of time and the provision no longer exists, but has been replaced by a different provision, it would not be proper for this Court to depart from the interpretation which has held the field for a very long time. We may refer in this connection to a decision of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
