LexKUNDAN LAL SRIKISHAN MATHURA (U.P.) versus COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P. AND ANOTHER
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
KUNDAN LAL SRIKISHAN MATHURA (U.P.).
v.
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, U.P. AND ANOTHER.
\'""
FEBRUARY 3, 1987
B
[E.S. VENKATARAMIAH AND M.M. DUTT, JJ.]
c
Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 19~s. 21 and 22-0rder passed
under s.21-Assessee held not liable to pay any more tax-Application
for rectification of the original assessment order moved-Period of
limitation-Whether to commence from the date of the original assess-
ment order or from the date of order passed under s .21.
An assessment order was passed in respect of the turnover of the
appellant-firm for the year 1975-76 by the Sales Tax Officer on
7.2.1979. Thereafter, the Sales Tax Officer issued a notice under s.21 of
the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948, proposing to make a reassess-
D
ment on the ground that the mandi cess and arhat (commission) had
escaped assessment and direded the appellant to appear along with its
account books on 18. 1. 1980. The Sales Tax Officer passed the order
under s.21 on the same date holding that the appellant was not liable to
pay any more tax.
E
In the year 1982 the ap11ellant med four applications under s.22 for
}-
F
rectification of the mistakes in the assessment orders for assessment
years 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 on the gronud that the
turnover in respect of purchases made on behalf of Ex-U.P. principals
had been wrongly assessed to sales tax. All the four applications were
rejected by the Sales Tax Officer on merits.
The appellant preferred appeals and the Appt'.iate Authority
allowed the appeals relating to the assessment orders for the assessment
years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 on merits but dismissed the appeal
in respect of the assessment order for the assessment year 1975-76 on
the ground that the applicalion for rectification had been filed beyond
G
three years from the date of the original order of assessment and was
thus barred by limitation.
The appellant filed second appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal in
respect of the assessment year 1975-76. The Department also preferred
second appeals in respect of the orders of assessment for assessment
H years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79. The Tribunal allowed the appeal
140
("'(
)
I
-·
..
K. LAL S. MATHUR v. COMM. OF S. TAX
141
of the appellant holding that the rectification application made in A
respect of the assessment order for the assessment year 1975-76 was
within limitation as the original order dated 7 .2. 1979 had ceased to exist
on the re-opening of the assessment and the final order had been passed
on 18. l. 1980 within three years from the date of the application for
rectification which had been filed on 4.11.1982. However, the appeals
of the Department were dismissed.
B
Ont of the four revision applications filed by the Department, the
High Conrt dismissed three applications and allowed the revision appli-
cation in respect of the application for rectification of the assessment
order for the assessment year 1975-76 holding that the application for
rectification had been filed beyond three years from the date of the
original order dated 7 .2. 1979 and that the order dated 18. l. 1980 had no
effect on the qnestion of limitation.
c
In the appeal to this Court, on behalf of the appellant it was
contended that on the issue of the notice under s.21 of the Act original
assessment order ceased to be in force and that the only order of assess-
D
ment in respect of assessment year 1975-76 which should be taken into
consideration for all purposes including the application for rectification
of mistake is the order dated 18. 1. 1980.
On behalf of the State it was contended that since no order of.
reassessment had actually been passed in the instant case on 18. 1. 1980
E
but only an order discharging the notice issued under s.21 of the Act
had been passed the original order of assessment passed on 7 .2. 1979
continned to remain in force.
Allowing the appeal,
HELD: 1. The judgment of the High Court is set aside and the
decision of the Tribunal restored. I 150G J
2. Section 2 l of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948, authorises
the assessing authority to make an order of assessment or reassessment.
F
It says that if the assessing authority has reason to believe that the whole
G
or any part of the turnover of a dealer, for any assessment year or part
thereof, has escaped assessment to tax or has been under-assessed or
has been assessed to tax at a rate lower than that at which itExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.