COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX Vs. RAMESHLAL KESHAVLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh, at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Madhya Pradesh, has in this reference under Section 44 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Genera) Sales Tax Act, 1958, referred the following questions for the opinion of this court:

(2.) THE present reference arises on the following facts : The respondent, a trader liable to pay sales tax, was being assessed for the period from 1st April, 1959, to 31st October, 1959. The order of assessment was passed on 9th July, 1962. The department further scrutinised the affairs of the respondent and found that the assessment made was low. Consequently, a notice dated 15th February, 1965 (vide annexure B) was issued to the respondent to show cause as to why the assessment made be not revised. That notice was served on the respondent on 17th February, 1965. In pursuance of that an order of reassessment was passed on 22nd September, 1965, wherein the assessment was enhanced. Aggrieved by that order the respondent filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who by order dated 24th January, 1966 (vide annexure D), dismissed the appeal. The respondent filed a second appeal against that order and the Board of Revenue by order dated 25th January, 1967, allowed the assessee's appeal and held that the reassessment proceedings were barred by time in view of Section 19 (1) of the Act. Consequently, the second appeal was allowed and at the instance of the department, the present reference has been made. At this stage it may be pertinent to note that Section 19 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, was amended by M. P. Amendment Act No. 20 of 1964. There were some amendments made in the years 1961 to 1963. Presently, we shall scrutinise as to which of the amending Acts would govern the present case. 3. Section 19 of the M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958, at the relevant time, i. e. , in the year 1959, stood as follows :

(3.) THE question before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, which made this reference, was whether the period of limitation for making reassessment would be governed according to the provisions of Section 19 (1), as it stood at the time when the notice for reassessment was issued, or in accordance with its provisions existing during the period of assessment. The contention of the department was that if a change is made in the period of limitation for reopening assessment before expiry of the original period of limitation, the change so made will also govern reassessment for the old periods. It was also contended that a calendar year under Section 19 (1) means the year beginning from 1st January and ending on 31st December. These contentions found favour with the Tribunal on the authority of the decision of this court in Jeewakhan Musabhai, Ujjain (Firm) v. Madhya Pradesh State 1970 M. P. L. J. 220.