Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (9) TMI 592

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t") and as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act (for short, "the Central Act") by the Sales Tax Officer, Rajnandgaon by order dated November 15, 1966. The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jabalpur, however, in exercise of powers of revision under section 39(2) of the State Act, found that such orders of assessment were erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. By order dated January 29, 1973, the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jabalpur, set aside the order of assessments passed under the State Act and remanded the case back for assessments in accordance with law and the observations in the said order. By another order dated April 8, 1973, the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, Jabalpur, set aside the order of a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the relevant time and the turnover of the applicant was beyond Rs. 30 lakhs the correct procedure in such a case would be for the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax to pass final orders himself under section 39(2) of the State Act. Aggrieved by the said order of the Board of Revenue dated February 24, 1981, the applicant filed an application for reference under section 44(1) of the Act, before the Tribunal for referring the questions of law which arose out of the orders passed by the Board of Revenue, but, the same was rejected by the Board of Revenue. Thereafter, the applicant moved the High Court for reference and by order dated February 13, 1989 [Chhota Bhai Jetha Bhai Patel and Company v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P. Indore [1991] .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... remand and it is this reason which had weighed with the Board of Revenue to take a view that the correct procedure in such a case would be that the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax makes the assessments in exercise of his powers under section 39(2) of the State Act. 5.. Section 39(1) of the State Act, which contains the power of revision of Commissioner is quoted hereinbelow: "The Commissioner may, either of his own motion or on application by a dealer or person made within the prescribed period from the date of the order, call for the record of the proceeding in which any order was passed, and on receipt of the record may make such enquiry or cause such an enquiry to be made, as he considers necessary and subject to the provisio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s it was found in that case that after the remand of the case by the Commissioner in a revision against the order passed by the Additional Assistant Sales Tax Officer, the Sales Tax Officer had issued fresh notice under section 18(6) for initiation of further assessments proceedings beyond the period of limitation prescribed in the said provisions of the Act and the High Court of Madhya Pradesh held that the word "remand" used by the Commissioner in his order passed under section 39 of the State Act, in its ordinary grammatical and well-understood connotation, only means the sending back of a case or proceeding to that Tribunal or authority which had dealt with or considered it at some prior stage for taking some further action thereon. 7 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y Mr. Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax had passed the orders of revision way back on January 29, 1973 and April 8, 1973 and the said orders passed by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax were not disturbed by any authority or court and had thus become final. The Board of Revenue could not have altered the said orders passed by the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax in the revision and could not have held that the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax should make the final order under section 39(2) of the State Act. 9.. We accordingly answer the question referred to us as indicated above in the negative and hold that the Tribunal was not right in directing the Additional Commissioner o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates