COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX ORISSA Vs. HALARI STORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted in all the matters.

(2.) These appeals by special leave, raise the question "whether the Commissioner of Sales Tax, suo motu can revise under clause (a) of sub-section (4) of Section 23 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (in short "the Act") read with Rule 80 of the Orissa Tax Rules (in short "the Rules"), an appellate order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax."

(3.) The respondent herein is a registered dealer under the Act and running a wholesale business in purchase and sale of beetle nuts at Malgodown, Cuttack. In pursuance to the notices issued under Section 12(4) of the Act, the respondent appeared before the concerned Sales Tax Officer and produced the books of accounts for the relevant assessment years for verification. The Sales Tax Officer rejected the books of accounts produced by the respondent-dealer and completed the assessments to the best of his judgment. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent-dealer preferred appeals before the first appellate authority, namely, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Cuttack, under Section 23(1) of the Act. The appellate authority by its orders allowed the appeals in part for the assessment year 1992-93 and in full for the assessment year 1993-94. Thereafter, the Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax, exercising his suo motu revisional power conferred under Section 23(4)(a) of the Act read with Rule 80 of the Rules, issued notices dated 9-6-1995 to the respondent-dealer to show cause as to why should the appellate orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax be not revised, the same being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. It is at this stage, the respondent-dealer challenged the said notices by means of writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Orissa. The contention of the respondent dealer before the High Court was that the Commissioner of Sales Tax has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned notices. The High Court quashed the impugned notices and allowed the Original Jurisdiction Cases Nos. 4496 and 4497 of 1995. Want of jurisdiction in Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax in issuing the impugned notices to the respondent dealer was found by the High Court on two grounds. Firstly, the appellate order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax was not an order within the meaning of expression "order made under this Act" occurring in clause (a) of sub-section (4) of Section 23 of the Act and, secondly the proviso to sub-section (4)(a) of Section 23 places a limitation on the exercise of revisional power by the Commissioner when it concerns an appellate order.