UDHAMAL Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE same question of law and fact is involved in all these three cases. We are, therefore, disposing of them by means of a common judgment. The appellants in all the three cases are assessees from whom arrears of sales tax were due. The Sales Tax Officer made a request to the revenue authorities for the recovery of those arrears of sales tax as arrears of land revenue. The Tahsildar concerned took steps under section 279 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the U.P.Z.A. Act) to make the recoveries. By means of the writ petitions giving rise to these special appeals, the proceedings taken by the Tahsildar were challenged on the following two grounds :- 1. That the recovery of arrears of sales tax could not be made under the provisions of the U.P.Z.A. Act.

(2.) THAT the Collector alone could take steps for the recovery of the arrears as land revenue and inasmuch as the Tahsildar and not the Collector had started proceedings, the same were void. Neither of the two grounds appealed to the learned single Judge, who dismissed the writ petitions.

(3.) MR . Chatterji contends that section 279 of the U.P.Z.A. Act deals with the recovery of arrears of land revenue only and not arrears of sales tax. Consequently no proceedings for the recovery of arrears of sales tax could take place under the provisions of section 279 of the U.P.Z.A. Act. The submission is made by ignoring the provisions of section 8(8) of the Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and rule 50 of the rules framed under that Act.