INDO MARINE AGENCIES Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER BOMBAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner-Company was assessed to sales-tax under s. 35 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, for the year 1972-73 by Ext. P4 dated 13-3-1975. A penalty was imposed upon it under Ext. P5 dated 13 81975. A notice of demand was served on it by the 3rd respondent, Deputy Tahsildar, mattancherry, Cochin, under S. 7 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act. THEse orders are challenged by the petitioner.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner, Shri Chakkappan Kalliath, submits that Ext. P4 levying sales-tax in respect of the sales in question is null and void as such levy is barred under Art. 286 of the Constitution. Consequently Ext. P5 imposing penalty upon the petitioner is also null and void. COUNSEL further submits that the notice issued under S. 7 by the 3rd respondent Deputy Tahsildar is invalid as he is not a competent officer to initiate proceedings for collection of revenue due and payable to the Collector of Bombay. COUNSEL also submits that the provisions of either the Kerala revenue Recovery Act, 1968, or the Revenue Recovery Act, 1890, do not authorise collection of revenue in one State on behalf of the authorities of another state.

(3.) AS regards the contention that the Deputy Tahsildar (3rd respondent) is not competent to issue Ext. P7 for the reason that the collector (2nd respondent) who is the competent authority under S. 69 of the kerala Revenue Recovery Act is not entitled to delegate his power, it has only to be stated to be rejected in the light of the decision of this Court in tahsildar, Alwaye v, Antony (1977 KLT. 26), over-ruling an earlier decision to the contrary in Antony v. Tahsildar, Alwaye (1975 KLT. 440 ).