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

2014 (6) TMI 881

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... such powers were delegated to the Sales Tax Officer to exercise the revisional jurisdiction and, therefore, the only power, which could have been available to the Sales Tax Officer was under Section 72 of the Act only. - tribunal has not committed any error in considering and/or treating the power exercised by the Sales Tax Officer levying the interest under Section 72 of the Act Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the decision of the tribunal that the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer should be deemed to have been passed under the provisions of Section 72 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 and that as it was passed after the prescribed period of limitation contained therein was over, it was time-barred, is leg .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he order passed by the Sales Tax Officer should be deemed to have been passed under the provisions of Section 72 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 and that as it was passed after the prescribed period of limitation contained therein was over, it was time-barred, is legally correct? 2. The facts leading to the present Reference in a nutshell are as under. 2.1. The respondent herein-M/s. Yashvijay Co., a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act, 1969 as well as the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act, 1956), was carrying on the business of reselling cotton. The respondent was assessed under the Act, 1969 as well as the Central Act, 1956 for the co-operative year, which was also the Assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... passed the order dated 30/04/1985 directing the respondent to pay ₹ 19,013.06 as interest under Section 47(4A) of the Local Act. 2.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer levying the interest under Section 47(4A) of the Local Act, the respondent preferred appeal before the first appellate authority, which came to be dismissed on merits. 2.3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid orders, the respondent preferred Second Appeal before the tribunal and the tribunal held that the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer can be said to be an order passed under Section 72 of the Act rectifying the earlier order of not charging interest under Section 47(4A) of the Local Act and, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the Sales Tax Officer in Form No.45, which was in the form of revision, which is required to be passed in exercise of revisional jurisdiction and, therefore, the tribunal ought to have treated the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer as in exercise of powers under Section 67 of the Act. It is submitted that therefore consequently the tribunal has materially erred in holding that the exercise of powers by the Sales Tax Officer was beyond the period of limitation. It is submitted that if the tribunal would have treated the order under Section 67 of the Act, applicability of the period of limitation mentioned under Section 72 of the Act would not have arisen and, therefore, it is requested to answer the questions in favour of the appellant .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er was under Section 72 of the Act only. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the tribunal has committed any error in considering and/or treating the power exercised by the Sales Tax Officer levying the interest under Section 72 of the Act. Under the circumstances, the question no. (a), which is referred to this Court is answered against the appellant. 8. Now so far as question no. (b) is concerned, it would be a consequential question. Once it is held that the powers were exercised by the Sales Tax Officer under Section 72 of the Act, such powers of rectifying its own mistake were required to be exercised within a period of two years. In the present case, it has been found that the powers were e .....

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