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

2010 (7) TMI 905

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dure followed by the assessing authority in passing the said order, unless the appellate authority/STAT is satisfied that such defect or irregularity has caused material hardship, or has occasioned failure of justice. In the absence of a power of review, section 72 cannot be pressed into service before the assessing authority himself. Once an order of assessment is passed, the statutory remedy available to an assessee, to question the validity of the assessment order, is only by way of an appeal, and not under section 72 of the Act. Appeal dismissed. - Writ Petition No. 9495 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 30-7-2010 - PRAKASH RAO B. AND RAMESH RANGANATHAN, JJ. The judgment of the court was delivered by RAMESH RANGANATHAN J. The endorseme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... view of the clarification, the proposed levy of tax at four per cent was being confirmed. The petitioner was called upon to pay tax of Rs. 6,43,177 within 30 days from the date of service of the order, and was informed that an appeal lay against the order of assessment, under section 31(1) of the Act, within 30 days of receipt thereof. The petitioner submitted an application on March 11, 2010, under section 72 of the Act, requesting the assessing authority to re-examine the issue. In his endorsement dated March 29, 2010, the first respondent observed that he was not competent to review the matter already finalized; and the petitioner should, instead, have filed an appeal under section 31(1) before the competent authority within the stip .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n claimed by them. The only question which necessitates examination is whether the assessing authority (first respondent) was justified in refusing to examine the petitioner s request, made under section 72 of the Act, on the ground that he was not competent to review the order already finalized ; and that the remedy available to the petitioner was only by way of an appeal. Section 72 of the Act reads as under: No assessment made, penalty or compounding fee levied or other order passed by any officer or authority under the Act, shall be set aside merely on account of any defect or irregularity in the procedure relating thereto, unless it appears that such defect or irregularity has in fact occasioned material hardship or failure of j .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g authority himself as the Act, neither expressly nor by necessary implication, has conferred on him the power to review his own orders. Section 72 of the Act is not a source of power for the assessing authority to review the assessment order passed by him earlier. The said provision merely prohibits an order, such as an assessment order, being set aside merely for a defect or irregularity in procedure, except where such a defect or irregularity has occasioned material hardship or failure of justice. As the assessing authority under the Act has not been conferred the power of review, section 72 does not enable an assessee to file an application requesting him to set aside the assessment order passed by him earlier. Section 72 has no a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... himself. Once an order of assessment is passed, the statutory remedy available to an assessee, to question the validity of the assessment order, is only by way of an appeal, and not under section 72 of the Act. The endorsement of the first respondent, refusing to entertain the application filed by the petitioner under section 72 of the Act, does not, therefore, necessitate interference in proceedings under article 226 of the Constitution of India. We make it clear that we have not examined the merits of the contentions urged before us by Sri M.V.J.K. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and have limited our examination only to the scope and effect of section 72 of the Act, and the validity of the endorsement of the assessing autho .....

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