PRAKASH KRISHNA, J. - (1.) THE present revision is directed against the order dated January 5, 1991 passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Moradabad, on Misc. Application No. 21 of 1992 for the assessment year 1977 -78 in Second Appeal No. 209 of 1983 decided on October 16, 1989.
(2.) THE present revision arises out of application filed under Section 22 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 before the Tribunal on behalf of the department in Second Appeal No. 209 of 1983. The facts relevant for disposal of the present revision lies in narrow compass. The respondent is a registered dealer and was engaged in the business of purchase and sale of vegetable ghee, oil, etc. After rejection of books of account the assessment order was framed on March 22, 1980. The said order was set aside by the first appellate authority by order dated July 9, 1980 and the case was remanded to the assessing authority for fresh assessment with certain directions. The Sales Tax Officer framed fresh assessment order by order dated December 28, 1982. This order was unsuccessfully challenged before the first appellate authority. Thereafter the dealer -opposite party filed aforesaid second appeal before the Tribunal. A new point regarding limitation for making reassessment after the order of remand was raised before the Tribunal. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that copy of the order of remand was received on any day earlier than July 15, 1980 and no assessment order was framed within one year from July 15, 1980. The final assessment order was passed on December 28, 1982. The Tribunal repelled the argument raised on behalf of the department that in view of the U.P. Amending Act namely U.P. Act No. 16 of 1983, period of limitation for completion of assessment after remand has been extended up to December 31, 1982, the order passed by the assessing authority on December 28, 1982 is perfectly within the period of limitation. It took the view that the said Amending Act will have no application as the period of one year had already expired. Although it agreed that no such plea was raised earlier by the dealer and the procedural amendment is retrospective, but it will not reopen the matter which have become closed or dead. Ultimately the Tribunal took a view that reassessment after remand can be made under the U.P. Act No. 16 of 1983 only in those cases where the matter has not become dead or closed on October 15, 1981. The department thereafter filed an application under Section 22 of the Act for rectification of the above mistake in the order of the Tribunal on the ground that it suffered from an error apparent on the face of record. The said application has been rejected by the Tribunal by order under revision.
(3.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is relevant to notice here the amendment made in Section 21 of the Act by the U.P. Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1983 (U.P. Act No. 16 of 1983). Section 3 of the Amending Act reads as under: 3. Amendment of Section 21.In Section 21 of the Principal Act, - (a) In Sub -section (2) in the proviso thereto, for the word and figures 'March 31, 1982', the word and figures 'December, 31, 1982' shall be substituted and be deemed always to have been substituted....;