Supreme Court Of India
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX,uttar PRADESH
Versus
MADAN LAL DAYAL CHAND
Decided On : April 24, 1967
SALES TAX - Assessment - Turnover - Computation - Dealer commencing business during assessment year - Option to submit returns of turnover of assessment year - Whether section 18 (4) of U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 takes away right of election - Turnover to be computed in accordance with section 18 (4) despite election.
Fact of the Case:
The respondents commenced business in cotton textiles at Bulandshahr in U. P. during the assessment year 1949-50 and were assessed to sales tax under section 18 (3) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 15 of 1948, on their turnover of that year. During the assessment year 1950-51 the respondents filed quarterly returns. The Sales Tax Officer, Bulandshahr, rejected the contention of the respondents that they were liable to be assessed on the turnover computed in accordance with section 18 (4) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, and computed the taxable turnover of the respondents at Rs. 1,15,711-11-3, and assessed them to pay tax on that turnover.
Finding of the Court:
The High court was, therefore, right in answering both the brandies the question in the affirmative.
Issues: Whether section 18 (4) of U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 takes away the right of election of the assessment year conferred on every dealer by the first proviso to section 7 read With rule 39 (1) and whether tax is to be imposed on a new dealer on his turnover computed in accordance with section 18 (4) in spite of his election of the assessment year by filing quarterly returns ?
Ratio Decidendi: Ss. (4) of section 18 became inconsistent with the scheme of assessment of a dealer who exercised an option under rule 39 (1) to submit his turnover of the assessment year. We may assume that it may not have been intended by the Legislature that a dealer who has exercised an option to submit his turnover for the year of assessment instead of the previous year, should still for the year immediately following the year in which he has commenced business be assessed to tax on a notional turnover. But if the Legislature has failed to make an adequate provision enabling assessment to be made in the light of the option, it cannot be assumed that section 18 (4) became subject to such an implied limitation.
Final Decision: The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.
Judgment
SHAH, J.
( 1 ) THE following question referred for opinion under section 11 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, was answered by the High court of Allahabad, in both its branches, in the affirmative: "whether section 18 (4) takes away the right of election of the assessment year conferred on every dealer by the first proviso to section 7 read With rule 39 (1) and whether tax is to be imposed on a new dealer on his turnover computed in accordance with section 18 (4) in spite of his election of the assessment year by filing quarterly returns ?" The Commissioner of Sales Tax has appealed to this court with special lave.
( 2 ) THE respondents commenced business in cotton textiles at Bulandshahr in U. P. during the assessment year 1949-50 and they were assessed to sales tax under section 18 (3) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 15 of 1948, on their turnover of that year. During the assessment year 1950-51 the respondents filed quarterly returns. The Sales Tax Officer, Bulandshahr, rejected the contention of the respondents that they were liable to be assessed on the turnover computed in accordance with section 18 (4) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, and computed the taxable turnover of the respondents at Rs. 1,15,711-11-3, and assessed them to pay tax on that turnover. In appeal to the Judge (Appeals), Sales Tax, the order was confirmed. But the Judge Revisions) in exercise of power under section 10 of the Act set aside the order of the assessing authority and directed that taxable turnover of the respondents be calculated in accordance with the provisions of section 18 (4) of the Act. The High court of Allahabad agreed with the view of the Judge (Revisions ).
( 3 ) THE Commissioner of Sales Tax contended in this appeal that the taxable turnover of the respondents in respect of the year 1949-50 was liable to be computed under section 7 (2) of the Act read with rule 41 (5) of the Rules framed under the Act, and not under section 18 (4 ). To appreciate the contention, the relevant statutory provisions may first be noticed. Section 7 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 15 of 1948, as amended by Act 25 of 1948, read as follows : " (1) Subject to the provisions of section 18, every dealer whose turnover in the previous year is Rs. 12,000. 00 or more in a year shall submit such return or returns of his turnover of the previous year within sixty days of the commencement of the assessment year in such form and verified in such manner as may be prescribed: Provided that the State government may prescribe that any dealer or class of dealers may submit, in lieu of the return or returns specified in this section, a return or returns of his turnover of the assessment year at such intervals, in such form and verified in such manner as may be prescribed, and thereupon, all the provisions of this Act shall apply as if such return or returns had been duly submitted under this section. " Ss. (2) and (3) of section 7 provided that the assessing authority may, after such enquiry as he considers necessary, complete the assessment and assess the tax on that basis; if no return is submitted by the dealer or if the return submitted by him appears to be incorrect or incomplete, the assessing authority shall, after making such enquiry as he considers necessary, determine the turnover of the dealer to the best of his judgment and assess the tax on the basis thereof. Ss. (3) and (4) of section 18 as they stood at the relevant time read as follows: " (3) (a) Every dealer or a reconstituted firm commencing business during the course of an assessment year whose monthly turnover is estimated to be not less than Rs. 1,000. 00 shall give notice of the fact to the assessing authority within fifteen days of such commencement and shall submit monthly statements of his turnover within seven days of the expiry of each month in such form and verified in such manner as may be prescribed in respect of the portion of such year during which the business is continued. (b) If the asses
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.