- (1.) DR. R. R. MISRA, J. These three revisions arise out of a consolidated order dated 17th May, 1985, passed by the State Tax Tribunal for the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65. Although the assessee has been personally served in each of these three revisions, nobody has put in appearance on his behalf.
(2.) I have heard the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Commissioner of Sales Tax. During the year in question the assessee worked as weighman. Originally assessment orders were passed against the assessee but on appeal the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) had remanded the case for fresh assessment. Thereafter, admittedly in pursuance of the remand orders the Sales Tax Officer passed orders on 29th June, 1972, imposing tax in each of these years. On appeal the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), vide his consolidated order dated 20th September, 1974, dismissed all the appeals on the ground that the assessee had not deposited 20 per cent of the assessed tax as contemplated by the provisions under section 9 (1-B) (b) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. Aggrieved, the assessee filed second appeals before the Sales Tax Tribunal which have been disposed of by the impugned orders. The Tribunal has, however, taken the view that the requirement of deposit of 20 per cent of the assessed tax came into force with effect from 1st October, 1970, and since the original assessments were framed earlier to that date, the assessee acquired rights to prefer appeals under the law as it existed before 1st October, 1970. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal has held that it was not necessary for the assessee to have deposited 20 per cent of the assessed tax. Therefore, the Tribunal has set aside the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) and has remanded the cases back for rehearing.
(3.) HAVING heard the learned Standing Counsel, I find sufficient force in the contention raised on behalf of the Commissioner of Sales Tax that after remand, since fresh assessments were made in each of these cases only on 29th June, 1972, therefore right to file first appeals against these assessment orders had accrued on 29th June, 1972. Admittedly on this date the provision for deposit of 20 per cent of the assessed tax was in existence. Hence, in my opinion the Tribunal was not right in law in taking view that it has taken for deciding the right of appeal. In such a situation one has to take into consideration the date of order against which the appeal has to be filed and not the date of the original assessment orders as in the present case. To my mind since in the present case the assessment orders in pursuance of the remand orders were passed only on 29th June, 1972, it was imperative on the part of the assessee to have deposited 20 per cent of the assessed tax as provided under section 9 (1-B) (b) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act. Thus, in my opinion the impugned orders passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal in all the three revisions suffer from error of law and the same deserves to be set aside. In the result, all the three revisions succeed and are allowed with no order as to costs. The impugned orders passed by the Tribunal in so far as they state that it was not obligatory on the part of the assessee to have deposited 20 per cent of the assessed tax are incorrect and the view taken by the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) in these cases is confirmed. Petitions allowed. .;