J.K.Ranka, J. - (1.) BY instant sales tax revision petition, the petitioner -Assessing Officer has assailed the order dt. 17/03/1999 passed by the Rajasthan Tax Board (for short, "Tax Board") by which the Tax Board, while dismissing the appeal of the petitioner -Assessing Officer, has upheld the order dt. 22/02/1990 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) (for short, "DC(A)") by which the DC(A), while partly allowing the appeal filed by the respondent -assessee and deleting the penalty imposed by the petitioner -Assessing Officer upon the respondent -assessee, has remanded the matter back to the petitioner -Assessing Officer for passing fresh orders. Brief facts of the case, as emerging from the record, are that on 01/06/1989 a survey was conducted by the Anti Evasion Wing of the petitioner -department and an order came to be passed by the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Anti Evasion, Ajmer on 27/09/1989 which was challenged by the respondent -assessee before the DC(A), who, without going into the merits, simply opined that the matter is to be reconsidered by the regular Assessing Officer rather than the decision already taken by the Anti Evasion Wing. He did not go into merits of the case at all and no issue was decided. Consequently, the petitioner -Assessing Officer challenged the order of the DC(A) as according the petitioner -Assessing Officer, the Anti Evasion Wing had the jurisdiction to decide the case. However, the Tax Board vide order dated 17/03/1999, as aforesaid, upheld the directions of the DC(A) and came to the conclusion that there was no justification for the officer of the Anti Evasion Wing to pass an order when the correct jurisdiction was with the regular Assessing Officer. Hence, this revision petition has been filed by the petitioner -Assessing Officer.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner -Assessing Officer submits that both the appellate authorities i.e. the Tax Board and DC(A) are unjustified in coming to the conclusion and the proper authority to pass assessment was only Anti Evasion Wing as the survey was conducted by the Anti Evasion Wing and survey team gathered information, found unrecorded sales and also loose papers and other discrepancies which could not be proved by the respondent -assessee. However, counsel admitted that nothing has been decided by both the appellate authorities and the matter has simply been restored/set aside to the regular Assessing Officer to pass regular assessment. I have considered the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioner and also perused the orders impugned. In my view, the order of the Tax Board needs no interference because no question of law has been decided by the Tax Board rather there is no finding at all even on facts.
(3.) BE that as it may, the DC(A) has simply restored the matter back to the regular Assessing Officer, who had the jurisdiction to pass assessment order and, therefore, the DC(A) had simply restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer as the correct jurisdiction to pass assessment order was on the regular Assessing Officer. When chance has been given to the regular Assessing Officer, then possibly, there could be no grievance to the petitioner -Assessing Officer to have objected to the order of the DC(A).;