- (1.) The petitioner has approached this Court impugning the notices dated 22.1.2007 (Annexure P-12 and P-13) issued under Section 40 of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (for short, 'the Act'), for the assessment years 1995-96 and 1996-97, respectively, for suo-moto revision of assessment.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the assessment of the petitioner for the year 1995-96 was framed on 28.3.2000, whereas for the year 1996-97, the same was framed on 31.7.2000. Notices under Section 40 of the Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the years 1995-96 and 1996-97 were issued on 3.7.2002. As the matter remained pending and were not finalised by the revisional authority and subsequently notices were issued on 22.1.2007, the petitioner filed CWP No. 5780 of 2007, which was allowed vide order dated 20.1.2010, opining that the notices were beyond limitation. The plea raised by the State relying upon the provisions of Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, was rejected. The State went before Hon'ble the Supreme Court by filing Civil Appeal No. 6927 of 2011. On 11.8.2011, Hon'ble the Supreme Court while setting aside the order passed by this Court, remitted the matter back to consider the issue as to whether the period provided in the section is for initiation of proceedings or conclusion thereof.
(3.) While referring to the provisions of Section 40 of the Act, under which power is sought to be exercised by the authorities, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the language plainly suggests that no order shall be revised after the expiry of period of five years from the date of order. It is the outer limit. This does not talk about issuance of show cause notice for initiation of proceedings. Referring to the language as used in Section 28(4) and 28(5) of the Act, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Legislature had used different language in those sections where the intention is for initiation of proceedings and not for conclusion thereof. In support of the plea, reliance was placed upon judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in State of Andhra Pradesh vs Toshiba Anand Batteries Limited, 1995 96 STC 664 and judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh vs Khetmal Parekh, 1994 93 STC 406 .;