Decided on July 12,1971



Obul Reddy, J. - (1.) The main question that arises in these two revisions is whether the Tribunal has correctly construed the scope of sub-section (4) of section 14 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The Tribunal was of the view that apart from the class of cases referred to by it in its order, the assessing officer cannot exercise his jurisdiction under sub-section (4) of section 14. In the words of the Tribunal: " He has only the power to correct any mistake made by him in computing the turnovers or and of making additional assessment where any new evidence is brought to his notice or is found in the records to which he had not adverted his mind".
(2.) These three circumstances according to the Tribunal, are not present in these two cases and therefore the assessing authority was not justified in exercising its jurisdiction under sub-section (4) of section 14 of the Act.
(3.) To appreciate the question involved, it is necessary to state the relevant facts leading up to the filing of this revision. The assessee is a dealer in palymyra jaggery and he was finally assessed for the year 1963-64 on a net turnover of Rs. 17,143-76 Ps. by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Nidadavole. During that assessment year jaggery was taxable at purchase point upto 31 st July, 1963 and at sale point from 1st August, 1963. The mistake committed by the assessing authorityconsisted in not applying the correct rate for the abovesaid two periods. The turnover as disclosed in the accounts showed purchases upto 31st July, 1963, Rs. 71,354-13 Ps. and sales from 1st August, 1963 to 31st March, 1964 Rs. 81,105-71 Ps. A notice Was therefore issued to show cause why the assessee should not be finally assessed to tax on the basis of the purchases made upto 3rst July, 1963, and sales made thereafter upto 3rst March, 1964. After considering the explanation, the assessing authority held that the turnover relating to sale of jaggery Rs. 81,105- 71 Ps. was not again taxable as tax was already paid in respect of this commodity at the purchase point. The assessing authority therefore, determined taxable turnover at Rs. 71,354-13 Ps. and levied tax at 3 per cent the rate that is applicable. That order Was carried in appeal and it was contended before the Assistant Commissioner that palmyra jaggery is not jaggery and therefore, purchases of the commodity made prior to 1st August, 1963, are not exigible to tax. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the contention observing that whether jaggery is manufactured from sugarcane or from palmyra juice, it is jaggery and jaggery as understood in popular parlance takes in palmyra jaggery as well as jaggery produced from sugarcane. As regards the competence of the assessing authority, he held that sub-section (4) of section 14 of the Act empowers him to make a reassessment when the assessment orginally made is made at a lower rate than what is provided for. The Tribunal did not agree with the Assistant Commissioner that the assessing authority could exercise his powers except in cases inferred to by it in its order to which we have already made a reference.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.