BALIA, J. - (1.) THE short issue has been raised in this petition. THE period for which the issue related ended on 31. 03. 1991. After regular assessment was framed, notices were issued u/s. 12 on 18. 4. 96 for re-opening the assessment for that period and final order of re-assessment was made on it. In this revision we are not concerned with the merit of the re-assessment order. Question is whether the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction u/s. 12 to issue notice on 18. 4. 96. THE question arises as a result of amendment effected in Sec. 12 of Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 by the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1991. In sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 the word `five' has been for word `eight'. In other words before its assessment.
(2.) RELEVANT part of sub-section (2) of Section 12 read prior to amendment w. e. f. 1. 4. 91 as under: " (2) No notice under sub-section (1) shall be issued in respect of any business, registration fee or exemption fee for any year after the expiry of eight years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Provided that. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Explanation: -. . . . . . . . . . . . Sub-section (2) in amended form is as under: No notice under sub-section (1) shall be issued in respect of any business, registration fee or exemption fee for any year after the expiry of five years from the end of the relevant assessment year. It is not disputed that case is neither covered by the proviso nor the Explanation in the question applies. There is no dispute also that the date on which relevant assessment year ended is 31. 3. 91. Under the unamended provision the re-assessment proceeding could be initiated upto 31. 3. 99. As per amended provision the last date upto which proceedings could be initiated u/s. 12 expired on 31. 3. 96. Learned counsel for the revenue contents that entire proceedings including re-opening of any completed proceedings are governed by the law that was in force during the relevant assessment year for which proceedings are initiated and not the law as on the date notices were issued. He places reliance on Section 6 of the Rajasthan General Clauses Act which reads as under: " Effect of repeal:-Where this Act, or any Central Act or Regulation made after the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter to be made then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not: (a ). . . . . . . . . . . (b ). . . . . . . . . . . (c) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment so repealed; or (d ). . . . . . . . . . . . (e ). . . . . . . . . . . . . and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the Repealing Act or Regulation had not been passed. " The argument though appears to be facile does not sustain itself on scrutiny.
(3.) THE provision reveals that repeal of enactment neither revive anything not in force or existing at the time at which repeal takes effect nor affects anything duly done or suffered thereunder. Repeal of an Act also does not affect the vested right that has come into existence prior to the commencement of the Repealing Act. Such rights remain enforceable. However, there is no vested right in the procedure or manner in which the right can be enforced. So far as procedure for enforcement is concerned unless otherwise provided by law it has to be as per the procedure existing as on the date such right or liability is sought to be enforced. While liability to be taxed existed, as per the provisions of the Act existing for the relevant period, however the manner and the procedure by which such right is to be enforced, if amended, has to be governed by the law as it exists from time to time. In this connection it becomes relevant to understand principle underlying. Section 30 of the Limitation Act 1908. It is cardinal principle of law of limitation that it bars. The remedy but does not extinguish right itself. It is merely law of procedure. The various Courts expressed their opinion that: The law of limitation being a law of procedure is retrospective in operation. Hence the law of limitation which is applicable to any particular suit or proceeding is the law which is in force on the day on which such suit or proceeding is instituted notwithstanding that the cause of action may have arisen before such Act came into force. Reference in this connection may be made in Sew Narayan Choudhary vs. M/s. Indian Roadways, Calcutta & Anr. (1), Mani Devi & Ors. vs. Ram Prasad & others (2) and in Ashutosh Das vs. Keshab Chandra Ghosh The Section 30 of the Limitation Act 1963 which provided that notwithstanding anything contained in this Act 1963; "any suit for which the period of limitation is shorter than the period of limitation prescribed by the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, may be instituted within a period of seven years next after the commencement of this Act, or within the period prescribed for such suit by the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, whichever period expires earlier. ;