Skip to content


Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer Vs. N.L. Singhal and Sons and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectSales Tax
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberD.B. Sales Tax Reference Case No. 182 of 1980
Judge
Reported in[1987]64STC176(Raj)
AppellantAssistant Commercial Taxes Officer
RespondentN.L. Singhal and Sons and anr.
Appellant Advocate G.S. Bapna, Adv.
Respondent Advocate V.K. Singhal, Adv.
DispositionApplication dismissed
Cases ReferredCommissioner of Sales Tax v. S.K. Manekia
Excerpt:
- section 2(k), 2(1), 7 & 40 & juvenile justice (care and protection of children) rules, 2007, rule 12 & 98 & juvenile justice act, 1986, section 2(h): [altamas kabir & cyriac joseph, jj] determination as to juvenile - appellant was found to have completed the age of 16 years and 13 days on the date of alleged occurrence - appellant was arrested on 30.11.1998 when the 1986 act was in force and under clause (h) of section 2 a juvenile was described to mean a child who had not attained the age of sixteen years or a girl who had not attained the age of eighteen years - it is with the enactment of the juvenile justice act, 2000, that in section 2(k) a juvenile or child was defined to mean a child who had not completed eighteen years of a ge which was given prospective prospect -..........the short ground that the application is incompetent as an appeal was not maintainable before the division bench of the board of revenue tinder sub-section (4a) of section 14 of the act, against the order passed by the single member of the board of revenue on an application for rectification under section 17 of the act.2. a single member of the board of revenue by his order dated 1st january, 1976, allowed the application for rectification presented under section 17 of the act. the assistant commercial taxes officer, ward i 'a', circle 'f', jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing authority'), filed an appeal before the division bench of the board of revenue under sub-section (4a) of section 14 of the act, which was dismissed by the order dated 11th august, 1978. an application.....
Judgment:

Dwarka Prasad, J.

1. This application under Sub-section (3A) of Section 16 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), can be disposed of on the short ground that the application is incompetent as an appeal was not maintainable before the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue tinder Sub-section (4A) of Section 14 of the Act, against the order passed by the single Member of the Board of Revenue on an application for rectification under Section 17 of the Act.

2. A single Member of the Board of Revenue by his order dated 1st January, 1976, allowed the application for rectification presented under Section 17 of the Act. The Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, Ward I 'A', Circle 'F', Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing authority'), filed an appeal before the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue under Sub-section (4A) of Section 14 of the Act, which was dismissed by the order dated 11th August, 1978. An application for making a reference was filed by the assessing authority before the Board of Revenue under Section 15(1) of the Act seeking that a question of law arising out of order of the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue dated 11th August, 1978, be referred to this Court for its decision. As the application for making a reference was not disposed of by the Board of Revenue within a period of 180 days, an application under Section 15(3) of the Act was filed by the assessing authority before this Court on 17th October, 1979.

3. Under the provisions of Sub-section (10) of Section 13 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984, this application would have been deemed to be an application for revision under Section 15, as amended by the amending Act of 1984, if the application would have been proper and valid application under Sub-section (3A) of Section 15, as it stood prior to the amendment.

4. It may be observed that under Sub-section (4A) of Section 14 of the Act, an appeal to a Division Bench of the Board of Revenue could be filed against an order passed by a single Member of the Board under Sub-section (2) or (3) of Section 14 of the Act, but no appeal has been provided to the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue against the order passed by a single Member of the Board under Section 17 of the Act, on an application for rectification. In this view of the matter the appeal filed by the assessing authority before the Division Bench of the Board against the order passed by the single Member of the Board of Revenue dated 1st January, 1976, was not maintainable. However, even if the appeal was entertained by the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue erroneously, in respect of an order passed by a single Member of the Board on a rectification application filed before the Board of Revenue itself under Section 17 of the Act, then also the order of the Division Bench dismissing such an appeal or allowing the same would be considered to be an order passed by the Board in relation to the proceedings for rectification under Section 17 of the Act. As such, no application for reference under Section 15 is competent in respect of such an order passed by the Board in the proceedings for rectification under Section 17 or in relation to such proceedings under Section 17 initiated before the Board of Revenue itself. This view was taken by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commercial Taxes Officer, Circle II, Jaipur v. Sambar Salts Ltd. (D. B. Sales Tax Reference Case No 40 of 1978 decided on 16th July, 1979) following an earlier decision of this Court in Commercial Taxes Officer v. Radha Ballabh & Sons (Sales Tax Case No. 18 of 1977 decided on 18th July, 1977). It was held in the aforesaid decisions that an order passed by the single Bench of the Board of Revenue under Section 17 of the Act on an application for rectification could not be considered as an order passed under Sub-section (2) or (3) of Section 14 of the Act and as such no appeal lay before the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue against an order passed on a rectification application made under Section 17 of the Act before the Board of Revenue.

5. Similar view was also taken by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Sales Tax v. S.K. Manekia [1975] 36 STC 249. It was held in that case that an order passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal on a rectification application under Section 23A cannot be made subject-matter of a reference to the High Court and that a reference on questions arising out of an order passed by the Tribunal on a rectification application is incompetent and the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain such an application for reference.

6. We are in agreement with the two earlier decisions of this Court referred to above and as the reference application in the present case arises out of an application for rectification filed before the Board of Revenue under Section 17 of the Act, the same was not maintainable under Section 15(3A) of the Act, as they existed prior to the amendment of 1984. Therefore, the application filed in the present case by the assessing authority cannot be treated as a revision petition under Section 15(1) of the amended provisions of the Act.

7. The reference application is consequently dismissed as not maintainable.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //