COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, MADHYA PRADESH versus M/S. AMARNATH AJITKUMAR OF BHIND, MADHYA PRADESH

Citation: [1972] 1 S.C.R. 828 · Decided: 20-09-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. HEGDE · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

828 
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, MADHYA PRADESH 
A 
v. 
M/S. AMARNATH AJITKUMAR OF BHIND, MADHYA 
PRADESH 
September 20, 1971 
[K. S. HEGDE AND A. N. GROVER, JJ.) 
Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, Samv. 2007, s. 12(1) and Madhya Pra-
desh Sales Tax Act, 1959, ss. 39(2) and 52-Assessment under former Act 
-Larger period for revision of ·assess1nent by Con1111issioner provided in 
latter Act-If could be availed of. 
Section 12(1) of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, Samv. 2007 pro-
hibits the Commissioner of Sales·tax from revising an order of assessment 
which had been made more than two years previously, whiles. 39(2), of 
the Madhya Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1959, which came into force on 
April I, 1959 and which repealed the Madhya Bharat Act, permits the 
C-Ommissioner to revise an order till the expiry of three years from the 
date of the order sought to be 'revised. 
The assessee was a registered dealer under the Madhya Bharat Act. 
For the period from July 1, 1957 to 31st March, 1958 he submitted 
returns. 
The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax passed an assessment 
order on November 28, 1961. On October 30, 1964, the Commissioner 
of Sales Tax initiated proceedings under s. 39(2) of the Madhya Pradesh 
Act for revising the assessment made. 
The assessee contended that as 
the assessment related to the period when the Madhya Bharat Act was in 
force the revision of the assessment was governed bys. 12(1) of that Act, 
.and therefore, the Commissioner could not have revised the order of 
assessment after the expiry of two years after the assessment was made. 
The High Court, in reference, held that, in view of s, 52 of the Madhya 
Pradesh Act, the governing provision was s, 12(1) of the Madhya Bharat 
Act. 
Dismissing the appeal to this Court, 
HELD: (1) The proviso to s. 52(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Act, pro-
vides that the repeal df the Madhya Bharat Act shall not affect any right 
already acquired or accrued there. 
The effect of s. 12(1) of the Madhya 
Bharat Act is that after the time prescribed in that provision the Com-
missioner could not revise the order of assessment either to the prejudice 
·of the assessee--0r of the Revenue. 
The section thus conferred a right both 
on the assessee as well as on the Department to see that an order of assess-
ment is not revised to their prejudice after two years from the date of the 
assessment order, 
Therefore, the effect of s, 52( I) of the Madhya Pra-
desh Act, is that all assessments, which include reassessments, should be in 
accordance with the repealed Act [835 B-E] 
Sales Tax Offi«r Circle I, Jaba/pur v, Hanuman Prasad 19 S.T.C. 87 
and Swastik Oil Mills Ltd. v, H, B, Munshi, Dy, Commissioner of Sales 
Tax, Bombay, 21 S.T.C. 383, followed. 
(2) The second part of the proviso no doubt provides that any action 
1aken under the repealed Act shall, in so 'far as it is not inconsistent with 
the provisions of the latter Act, be deemed to have been done under the 
latter Act But there is undoubtedly a conflict between s. 12(1) of the 
Madhya Bharat Act ands. 39(2) of the Madhya Pradesh Act. Therefore, 
the Revenue cannot call in aid the second part of the proviso. 
[835 E-HJ 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
C.S.T. v. AMARNATH (Hegde, J.) 
829 
A 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 367 of 
1969. 
B 
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 
October 28, 1968 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc. 
Civil Case No. 188 of 1967. 
I. N. Shroff, tor the appellant. 
The respondent did not appear. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
c 
Hegde, J. 
This appeal by special leave arises from the deci-
sion of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in a reference under s. 44 
of the Madhya Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1959. 
The reference was 
made by the Board of Revenue. 
After stating the ,case, the Board 
D 
E 
of Revenue referred the following question to the High Court for 
its opinion. 
"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case 
the Commissioner of Sales Tax acted illegally in exer-
cising his powers of revision under section 39(2) of the 
Madhya Pradesh General Sales-Tax Act, 1958 in respect 
of the assessment order dated 28-12-1961 which was 
passed in respect of the returns submitted on 30-1-1958 
and 17-6-1958 and on the basis of the notice in form 
XI issued on 29-8-1961 ?" 
The High Court answered that question in the affirmative and 
in favour of the assessee. 
Aggrieved by that order, the Com-
missioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh has come up in 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.