Decided on November 06,1963

K.KANNAIAH Appellant


Chandra Reddy, C.J. - (1.) The proper interpretation of section 41 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (VI of 1957) is involved in this enquiry. This writ petition relates to the assessment years 1956-57. The petitioner,, who is a dealer in tobacco, was assessed to tax by the proper Commercial Tax Officer by an order dated 27th March, 1959 and a sum of Rs. 9,962-2-5 was demanded as the tax due and payable by him. It is to quash this order of assessment that the writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, contending that it was beyond the competence of the department to make an assessment in respect of purchases made during the period of the operation of the Madras General Sales Tax Act after it had ceased to be in force.
(2.) Before we deal with the controversy relating to the construction of section 41, we have to read that section. It postulates : "(1) The Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939 (Madras Act IX of 1939), the Hyderabad General Sales Tax Act, 1950 (Hyderabad Act XVI of 1950), the Madras Tobacco (Taxation of Sales and Registration) Act, 1953 (Madras Act IV of 1953), the Andhra General Purchase Tax Act, 1956 (Andhra Act XIII of 1956), and section 21-A of the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937 (Madras Act X of 1937) are hereby repealed : Provided that such repeal shall not affect the previous operation of the said Acts or section or any right, title, obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or incurred thereunder, and subject thereto, anything done or any action taken (including any appointment, notification, notice, order, rule, form, regulation, certificate, licence or permit) in the exercise of any power conferred by or under the said Acts or section shall be deemed to have been done or taken in the exercise of the powers conferred by or under this Act, as if this Act were in force on the date on which such thing was done or action was taken ; and all arrears of tax and other amounts due at the commencement of this Act may be recovered as if they had accrued under this Act."
(3.) We need not quote sub-section (2), as it is not material for our present purpose. We are here mainly concerned with the import of the expression " obligation or liability already acquired, accrued or incurred thereunder." The argument pressed upon us by Sri P.A. Chowdary, learned Counsel for the petitioner, is that, the relevant clause has reference only to the tax ascertained and levied and does not take in chargeability to tax.;

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