BALIA, J. - (1.) THESE two petitions raise a common question to be determined hence are being heard and decided together.
(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer dated 16. 7. 97 in Appeals No. 100/95 and 101/95. THEse appeals arose out of assessment orders made on 15. 01. 1994 in respect of assessment period 1982-83 and 1983-84 respectively. THE Tribunal has found that these two assessment orders being time barred under sub-section (2) of Section 10b, as the same were not made within two years from the date of appellate order, in of compliance which they were made. THE Tribunal has not examined the appeal on merit of the assessment. For determination of the question whether the orders dated 15. 1. 94 passed in each of the revisions were time barred, the facts necessary for the present purpose may be noticed. In respect of two assessment periods, the original assessment orders were set aside by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes Department, Jodhpur vide his order dated 16. 2. 90 and the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Authority namely Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Ward, Anti Evasion, Jodhpur for framing the on the assessment in accordance with law. This order of Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) was served on the Assessing Officer on 14. 03. 1992. The files have been transferred from ACTO Special Ward, Anti Evasion, Jodhpur to CTO Pali because Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer at the relevant time lacked the pecuniary jurisdiction on account of the total turn over of the assessee for that period. This is how the assessment orders came to be made by Commercial Taxes Officer. On 13. 2. 92 (as per assessing officer, and as per order of the Board such orders were made in fact on 14. 2. 92) orders were made to the best judgment of the Assessing Officer. Thereafter, the dealer moved an application on 19. 6. 92, for re-opening of those assessment proceedings under Section 10c of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954. That application of the assessee was allowed on 7. 7. 92. Thus the proceedings, again came to life and the finally assessment orders came to be made on 15. 1. 94 after affording opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. This assessment order dated 15. 1. 94 was challenged before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes, Jodhpur who dismissed the appeals on 30. 12. 94. Further appeals against the appellate order has been allowed by the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, as aforesaid by holding that Assessment Order dated 15. 1. 94 were not made within two years of the orders passed by Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Taxes, Jodhpur and were time barred under Section 10b (2) of the Act. Hence, these two revisions by the Revenue. It may be noticed that during this period the assessee has also challenged the assessment orders dt. 15. 1. 94 directly before this Hon'ble Court by way of D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1502/1994, challenging the vires of Section 10b (1) Clause (iv ). Since, the petition of assessee has been allowed by the Rajasthan Tax Board and the assessment order has been set aside at the commencement of the arguments. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that at this stage, these revisions may be heard on the issue whether the orders dt. 15. 1. 94 were barred by time. If the orders are held to be barred by the time u/s. 10b (2), the question of vires of provisions of Sec. 10b (i) (iv) may become academic and the said writ petition may become infructuous. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the revenue that once orders were made on 13. 03. 1992 within two years of the service of appellate order on the Assessing Officer. The provision of Section 10b (2) have operated. Thereafter, if as a result of taking recourse to remedial measures against the order dated 13. 03. 1992 fresh proceedings have come into existence, the orders made thereafter cannot be held to be time barred with the aid of Section 10b (2) Learned counsel for the respondent joins issue and contends that the order dated 13. 03. 1992 was not the operative order having been set aside by the Assessing Officer himself. It cannot be taken into consideration and the only order dated 15. 1. 94 is relevant for the purpose of limitation u/s. 10b (2) The order dated 15. 1. 94 cannot by any stretch of imagination, be within limitation u/s. 10b (2)
(3.) IT was also contended by the learned counsel that order purported to have been made on 13. 1. 92 itself was beyond limitation, because in fact is has been passed actually on 14. 03. 1992, as found by the Tribunal and therefore order having been passed beyond limitation on 14. 03. 1992, the application dated 19. 6. 92 and any proceedings subsequent thereto cannot be of any avail, as they were wholly superfluous and can have no legal existence. He places reliance in the case of (Jaipur Udyog Ltd. vs. Commercial Taxes Officer, Special Circle, Ajmer (1 ). Having carefully considered the rival contentions and relevant provisions of the Act, I am of the opinion that these revisions merit acceptance. Section 10b : Prescribed time limit for assessments or orders to be made under various circumstances envisaged under the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 10 (B) governs the period of limitation for completion of assessment proceeding generally in different circumstances by the assessing authority which are pending before him. Sub-section (2): deals with time limit for giving effect to directions of the appellate/revisional authority or to orders passed by respective superior authorities. ;