V. K. SINGHAL, J. - (1.) THIS revision petition has been filed under section 15 (1) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter called as "the Act") raising the following questions of law : (1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the present case, when the Tribunal held that the non-petitioner had no jurisdiction to assess the petitioner and the assessment order and appellate order were set aside, the Tribunal could have remanded the case back for decision to the Commercial Taxes Officer, "b" Circle, Jaipur, for passing assessment order under section 10 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act ? (2) Whether the Tribunal could have remanded the case for framing fresh assessment to Commercial Taxes Officer, "a" Circle, Jaipur, especially when no assessment can be framed after the expiry of a period of 5 years from the end of the assessment year which had expired long ago in the instant case as provided under section 10b of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act ? (3) Whether the Tribunal was right in deciding the appeal on merits and then remanding the case to the Commercial Taxes Officer, Circle "a", Jaipur, inasmuch as the Commercial Taxes Officer, "a" Circle, Jaipur, cannot take any view contrary to the view taken by the Tribunal ? (4) Whether the Tribunal is correct in holding that the petitioner is a dealer carrying on the business within the meaning of section 2 (cc) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act ? At the time of hearing of the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order of the Tribunal is dated June 7, 1986, in which the matter was remanded for fresh assessment by the Tribunal to the Commercial Taxes Officer, "a" Circle, Jaipur, for fresh assessment. No stay was operating against the said order and in view of the provision of section 10b of the Act, the fresh assessment could have been made within the period of 2 years from the date of communication of the order to the assessing authority. In the present case since the order has not been framed within limitation prescribed under section 10b of the Act, no action now can be taken.
(2.) IN accordance with the provision of sub-section (3) of section 15 a new question was formulated as to whether any decision is required to be given in the revision filed by the assessee since the time-limit prescribed under section 10b has already expired, and fresh assessment has not been framed within the prescribed limit. The arguments of both the learned counsel were heard. The submission of Mr. Bapna is that he is not in a position to state as to whether the fresh assessment in order to give effect to the order of the Sales Tax Tribunal dated June 7, 1986, has been passed or not, and as such he cannot make any statement in this regard. It is, however, stated that if the order has not yet been framed within a period of 2 years from the date of communication to the assessing authority then the said order cannot be framed now in view of the provisions of section 10b (2) of the Act. I have considered over the matter. Learned counsel for the assessee is very confident that the order has not been passed and he does not want any relief at this stage since according to him the fresh assessment order in consequence of or to give effect to the order of the appellate authority has not been passed. If the said order has already been passed then the assessee would be entitled to challenge that order and no decision can be given in respect thereof. If the order has not been passed within the limitation as prescribed under section 10b (2) then no order can be passed now and it would be for the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to see as to who is the officer responsible for not framing the assessment by which the Revenue is deprived of its lawful dues. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes shall make an enquiry into the matter and take necessary action in accordance with law against the defaulting officer. With these observations the revision petition is dismissed as having become infructuous and no decision is given in respect of the various questions raised by the petitioner, and in respect of the question framed it is held that the fresh assessment if not already framed within the time-limit prescribed under section 10b (2) cannot now be framed. No order as to costs. Petition dismissed. .;