9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (11) TMI 760X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d prior to March 31, 2000 and for quashing or setting aside the impugned order dated June 17, 2002 and September 18, 2002 passed by respondent No. 2 and the Appellate and Revisional Board. 2.. The petitioner submitted necessary returns for the four quarter ending March 31, 2000 and assessment order was passed on April 2, 2002 by the respondent No. 1 rejecting the books of accounts of the petitioner. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the respondent No. 1 the petitioner filed an appeal before the respondent No. 2. By an order dated June 17, 2002 the respondent No. 2 refused to admit the appeal and rejecting the same on the ground of non-payment of 20 per cent of the disputed amount of tax in terms of the provisions of section 79 whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in Hoosein Kasam Dada (India) Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh [1953] 4 STC 114 (SC) and Arasu Rubber Corporation Ltd. v. Additional Deputy Commercial Tax Officer [2002] 126 STC 32 (Mad.). 6.. The learned State Representative Mr. Goswami submits that since the amendment was given effect from April 1, 2002 and the appeal was preferred on May 15, 2002, the appellate and revisional authority rightly demanded 20 per cent of the disputed amount of tax in terms of the provisos of section 79 of the amended Act. Hence there is no illegality or irrationality in the impugned orders passed by the appellate authority and the Board. 7.. The only point for consideration therefore, is, if the right of appeal is a pre-existing right and is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n favour of the petitioner and held as follows: "The imposition of the restriction by the amendment of the section could not affect the assessee's right of appeal from a decision in proceedings which commenced prior to such amendment and which right of appeal was free from such restriction under the section as it stood at the time of the commencement of the proceedings. Consequently the assessee's appeal should not have been rejected on the ground that it was not accompanied by satisfactory proof of the payment of the assessed tax." Thus we find that right of appeal from the decision of a Commercial Tax Officer or Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes to a superior forum becomes vested in a party when proceedings are first initiate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and although it may be actually exercised when the adverse judgment is pronounced such right is to be governed by the law prevailing at the date of the institution of the suit or proceeding and not by the law that prevails at the date of its decision or at the date of the filing of the appeal. (v) This vested right of appeal can be taken away only by a subsequent enactment, if it so provides expressly or by necessary intendment and not otherwise'." 10.. In view of the principles laid down by the honourable Supreme Court we hold that the learned Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and the learned Administrative Member of Board were not justified by rejecting the prayer of the petitioner. The proper appreciation of the settled pri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
