9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1074X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1994, therefore, there is no substance in the argument of the petitioner that by virtue of sub-section (2) if the application has not been decided within the specified time, the petitioner shall be entitled to have the order rectified in accordance with his application - The scope of section 71 cannot be enlarged to the extent of reviving or recalling the entire order on merit. The scope is very limited only to correct the mistakes or any error arising therein for accidental slip or omission - petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - Writ Petition No. 2508, 2511, 2517, 2518/2015 - - - Dated:- 29-4-2016 - P. K. Jaiswal And Vivek Rusia, JJ. For the Petitioners : P.M.Choudhary, P. R. Bhatnagar For the Respondent/State : Pushyamitra Bhargava ORDER Vivek Rusia, J. 1. Writ petition No.2508/15 has been filed against the order dated 27.08.2013 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Indore in Revision No.44/2013/Central (for the period from 01.04.1992 to 31.12.1992). 2. Writ petition No.2511/15 has been filed against the order dated 27.08.2013 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Indore in Revision No.43/2013/Sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Sales Tax Act (now repealed by Central Act). Vide order dated 29.01.1996, the first appeal was allowed by setting aside the assessment order by remanding the matter with direction to complete fresh assessment after giving opportunity to the petitioner to submit explanation against the proposed additions. As per the contention of the petitioner, the fresh proceedings were initiated by respondent No.1 in compliance of the appellate order dated 21.09.1996. The petitioner contended before the assessing officer that all the original papers such as declarations in F form are kept in B file which is a part of the assessment record and the original papers and the declaration etc. are liable to be taken into consideration. Thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner passed a fresh order dated 31.12.1998 by which he has maintained his earlier order dated 24.02.1995. 8. Petitioner again approached the first appellate authority challenging the fresh assessment order dated 31.12.1998 with the contention that the assessment was completed in absence of B file. The appellate authority disposed of the appeals by a common order dated 15.09.1999 and remanded the matters with a specific directi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e then appellant be directed to submit a duplicate copy of the information and declaration which were submitted by it. The aforesaid directions issued by the Appellate Authority have not been complied with by the Assessing Authority in its correct perspective inasmch as no finding has been recorded by the Assessing Authority about the availability or non-availability of B-File. True it is the petitioner also did not submit the duplicate documents, but as it is clear from the order dated 15.09.1999, it was the duty of the Assessing Authority to have directed the appellant in case of non-availability of B-File, to submit duplicate. It appears that no such specific directions were issued by the Assessing Authority to the petitioner to submit the duplicates of the declaration and other relevant information. Thereafter, before the Revisional Authority, when the petitioner had submitted an application seeking time to produce the duplicates, the prayer should have been allowed, but it was denied on the ground that no specific period is mentioned in the application within which the petitioner would submit duplicate copy of the declaration and other relevant material. This specific time lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the reivisional order dated 27.08.2013 and the said application was filed on 11.02.2014 and by virtue of sub section (2) of section 71 of the MPCT Act if the order is not rectified within the period specified in sub-section (1) , the applicant shall be entitled to have the order rectified in accordance with his application and accordingly the Commissioner shall rectify the order within one calendar year. 13. Per contra, Shri Pushyamitra Bhargava, learned Dy.A.G argued in support of the order passed by the revisional authority and submitted that the revisional authority has granted ample opportunity to the petitioner for submitting B Form/ F Form and other declarations but the petitioner has not submitted any documents, therefore, the revisional authority vide order dated 27.08.2013 has decided the matter and upheld the order of the appellate authority for the period 1992-93 and the petitioner himself has not produced any declarations as directed by this Court in W.P.No.771/2004, hence no interference is warranted in these writ petitions and the same are liable to be dismissed. 14. Having considered the averments made in the petition and the arguments submitted by the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner may- (i) On his own motion at any time within one calender year from the date of any order passed by him; or (ii) On an application made by a dealer within one calender year from the date of receipt of such application, rectify such order for correcting any clerical or arithmetical mistake or any error arising therein from any accidental slip or omission: Provided that the Commissioner shall not entertain any application by the dealer unless it is made within one year from the date of the order sought to be rectified Provided further that no such rectification shall be made if it has the effect of enhancing the tax or reducing the amount of refund unless the Commissioner has given notice in writing to the dealer of his intention so to do and has allowed the dealer a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (2) Where on an application made by a dealer for the rectification of any order, the order is not rectified within the period specified in sub-section (1) , the applicant shall be entitled to have the order rectified in accordance with his application and accordingly the Commissioner shall rectify the order, and where in proceedings initiated suo motu the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
