AGRAWAL, J. - (1.)IN this reference made under section 15 (1) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), the Board of Revenue has referred the following question : " Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the Board was right in holding that the revision petition presented by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle II, Jaipur who was the assessing authority at the relevant time of presentation of revision was not proper ?" M/s. S. Zoraster and Company, non-applicant (hereinafter referred to as "the assessee"), is a dealer registered under the Act. IN respect of assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1965-66 the assessee filed one consolidated return of its turnover for each assessment year. The Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Jaipur City Circle A (Special Ward) imposed penalty on the assessee under section 16 (1) (c) of the Act. The assessee filed appeals against the aforesaid orders passed by the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Jaipur City A, Special Ward and the said appeals were allowed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) I, Commercial Taxes, Jaipur. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) I, Commercial Taxes, the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle II, Jaipur filed two revision petitions in respect of the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66. The said revision petitions were dismissed as incompetent by the learned single Member of the Board of Revenue by order dated 27th February, 1974 on the ground that under section 14 of the Act the revision could only be filed by the assessing authority and that the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Jaipur City Circle A (Special Ward) who was the assessing authority in respect of the assessment years in question, alone could have filed the revision petitions and that the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle II, Jaipur was not the assessing authority of the assessee for the relevant period and therefore, he could not have filed the revisions. Against the aforesaid order of the learned single member of he Board of Revenue, special appeals were filed by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle I, Jaipur and the said special appeals were dismissed by the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue by judgment dated 18th February, 1974. The Division Bench held that the learned single member was perfectly justified in holding that the revisions were not maintainable as the same were not filed by the real assessing authority. Thereupon a reference application was moved under section 15 (1) of the Act by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle I, Jaipur. IN the said reference application it was stated that after passing of the assessment orders, the office of the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Jaipur City, Circle A (Special Ward) was abolished and the files of the cases were sent to the Commercial Taxes Officer, special Circle II, Jaipur by virtue of order dated 23rd October, 1967 passed by the Commissioner, Sales Tax under rules 3 and 4 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules and that on the date of filing of the revision petitions, the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle II, Jaipur alone was the assessing authority. IN the said reference applicant it was further stated that thereafter there was a change in the place of business of the assessee and as a result thereof the jurisdiction over the dealer came to be exercised by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle I, Jaipur and the special appeal against the order of the learned single Member of the Board of Revenue was, therefore, filed by the Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle I, Jaipur. On the basis of the aforesaid reference application the Board of Revenue has referred the question mentioned above for the opinion of this Court. We have heard Shri G. S. Bafna, the learned counsel for the department and Shri V. K. Singhal, the learned counsel for the assessee. Before dealing with the contentions of the learned counsel, we may refer to the relevant provisions of the Act. The expression "assessing authority" is defined in section 2 (b) of the Act as under : " 'assessing authority' in relation to a dealer means the Commercial Taxes Officer or the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer having jurisdiction. "
(2.)THE aforesaid definition of the assessing authority as contained in section 2 (b) was amended by Act No. 9 of 1976 and the words "for the time being" were added at the end. Since the present case related to the period prior to the enactment of Act No. 9 of 1976, we are concerned with the definition of "assessing authority" as it stood prior to the amendment introduced by Act No. 9 of 1976.
Section 10 of the Act makes provision for assessment and determination of tax by the assessing authority. Section 11 provides for recovery by the assessing authority of the tax determined as payable by the assessee. Section 12 provides for reopening of the assessment by the assessing authority in cases where whole or any part of the business of a dealer has escaped assessment to the tax, or if the registration fee or exemption fee has escaped levy or has been assessed at too low a rate in any year. Sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Act at the relevant time provided that the Board of Revenue may, on being moved by the assessing authority, call for and examine the record of any proceedings under this Act and if it considers that any order is illegal or improper or erroneous, it may pass such orders as it may think fit. The proviso to sub-section (5) of section 14 cempowered the Board of Revenue to stay the recovery of the disputed amount of tax or any part thereof pending disposal of the revision if the assessee furnishes sufficient security to the satisfaction of the assessing authority in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed. Section 17 of the Act contains the power of rectification of mistakes by the assessing authority.

A perusal of the aforesaid provisions shows that in addition of power for making assessments, the assessing authority has also been conferred with the power to recover the tax assessed as payable, under section 11 the power to rectify the order of assessment made by it under section 17 of the Act, the power to reopen an assessment under section 12 of the Act and the power to file revision petition before the Board of Revenue under section 14 of the Act.

Shri Bafna, the learned counsel for the applicant, has submitted that the expression "assessing authority" has the same meaning in sections 10, 11, 12, 14 and 17 of the Act and that the authority who is competent to assess the assessee at the particular time should be treated as the assessing authority in relation to the assessee. According to Shri Bafna if the expression "assessing authority" is construed to mean the authority who had passed the original assessment order, it may not be possible to exercise the powers conferred under sections 11, 12, 14 and 17 in certain cases when the authority which passed the original assessment order has ceased to exist as a result of reorganisation of and reconstitution of the administration. The submission of Shri Bafna was that a construction which leads to such a consequence should be rejected.

Shri Singhal on the other hand, has submitted that for purpose of section 14 of the Act the assessing authority can only be the authority which passed the original assessment order. According to Shri Singhal there are adequate provisions in the Act and the Rules to deal with a situation when the assessing authority has ceased to exist as a result of reorganisation and reconstitution and that in such a case the cases dealt with by the said authority can be transferred under rule 52 of the Rules to the authority who has been conferred the jurisdiction to assess the assessee. Shri Singhal has submitted that in the absence of transfer of the case under rule 52 of the Rules, the authority which passed the original assessment order along can be regarded as the assessing authority.

(3.)AFTER giving consideration to the above submissions, we find ourselves in agreement with the submissions of Shri Bafna and we are unable to accept the contentions of Shri Singhal.
A perusal of section 2 (b) of the Act, as it stood at the relevant time, shows that the expression "assessing authority" had used the words "in relation to a dealer means the Commercial Taxes Officer or Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer having jurisdiction". While considering the aforesaid definition of "assessing authority" under section 2 (b) of the Act, it is necessary to lay stress on the words "in relation to a dealer" and "having jurisdiction". These words indicate that the assessing authority has been defined with reference to the dealer. The words "having jurisdiction" indicate that the Commercial Taxes Officer or the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer who had jurisdiction in relation to the dealer was the assessing authority in so far as that dealer is concerned. In other words these expressions mean that the assessing authority who had jurisdiction over a particular dealer at a particular time was the assessing authority for that dealer at that time.

If the provisions of section 11 of the Act which provide for recovery of the tax determined are examined it would be seen that the said power to recover the tax has been conferred on the assessing authority. For the purpose of such recovery the assessing authority can only mean the officer who has jurisdiction to assess the dealer at the time of recovery and it cannot mean that officer who had passed the order of assessment but has ceased to have jurisdiction. Similarly for the purpose of exercising the power to reopen the assessment conferred under section 12 of the Act and the power to rectify the mistakes in the order of assessment conferred under section 17 of the Act can also be exercised by the officer having jurisdiction to assess the dealer at the time the aforesaid power is being exercised and it cannot be said that the said powers have to be exercised by the officer who has passed the original order of assessment even though he may have ceased to have jurisdiction to deal with the assessee at that time. In other words the expression "assessing authority" in sections 11, 12 and 17 of the Act must be construed to mean the officer who has jurisdiction in relation to the dealer at the time the said powers are being exercised. It cannot be assumed that in section 14 the expression "assessing authority" has been used in a different sense to mean the officer who had passed the original assessment order even though he has ceased to have jurisdiction at the time when the power conferred by section 14 is being exercised. In our view there is no basis for making this distinction and the expression "assessing authority" must be construed in the same sense in sections 11, 12, 14 and 17 of the Act. It must, therefore, be held that for the purpose of exercising powers conferred on it under sections 10, 11, 12, 14 and 17 of the Act referred to above, the assessing authority should be the authority having jurisdiction over the dealer at the particular time when the said power is being exercised.