9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 900X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -I-ST-76 dated 3rd August 1963 read with earlier order dated 5th May, 1963 the suo motu powers of the Commissioner exercisable under Section 23 (4) (a) was in fact delegated to the ACST in so far as the order sought to be revised is that the STO. This delegation of power continued till 17th July, 2008 when the notification of the OVAT Act was issued for the first time delegating the power of the Commissioner to the ACST under Section 79(1) of the OVAT Act. The position is that as on 31st January, 2008, the ACST could validly exercise the delegated power of suo motu revision in terms of Section 106 (2) (c) of the OVAT Act. Consequently, the challenge to the impugned notification on the ground that ACST did not have any power to issue suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Special Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax and not to the ACST. He also draws the attention to notification dated 17th July, 2008 whereby for the first time the Commissioner delegated the powers of the revision to the ACST. According to him, any action taken by the ACST prior to 17th July, 2008 exercising suo motu power under Section 79 (1) of the OVAT Act would be null and void. 4. On the other hand, Mr. Mishra, learned Standing Counsel for the Opposite Parties draws attention to Section 106 of the OVAT Act which is a transitional provision to account for powers delegated under the erstwhile Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1963 (OST Act) which stands repealed by the OVAT Act. According to him under Section 23 (4) (a) read with (d) of the OS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies, as have been conferred or imposed by or under the provisions of the repealed Act or the rules made and notifications issued thereunder or the persons appointed under any designation prescribed under the said Act to assist the Commissioner, and are exercised and performed on the day immediately before appointed day within or over a Circle or a Range or the State, as have been assigned to them by the Commissioner, shall, on and from the appointed day, for all intents and purposes, be deemed to have been conferred or imposed by or under the corresponding provisions of this Act on the persons who, under clause (b) are deemed to have been appointed under such designation to assist the Commissioner under this Act and shall be exercised and p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary, 2008, the ACST could validly exercise the delegated power of suo motu revision in terms of Section 106 (2) (c) of the OVAT Act. Consequently, the challenge to the impugned notification on the ground that ACST did not have any power to issue such notice is hereby negatived. 9. The second ground of challenge is that no reasons have been set out in the impugned notice for exercise of suo motu revisional power by the ACST. A plain reading of the impugned notice reveals the reasons that weighed with the ACST. Accordingly the Court finds no merit in this contention. 10. For the above reasons, the interim order is hereby vacated. The petition is dismissed. It will be now open to the Petitioner to reply to the show cause notice issued to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
