The main legal point established in the judgment is that the initiation of proceedings under section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 should occur within the prescribed limitation period, as interpreted from the language of the statute and previous judicial precedents.

ASHOK BHAN, J. - The only point canvassed before us is regarding limitation relating to initiation and termination of proceedings under section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), therefore we will confine ourselves to the facts relating to the controversy raised before us.

2. The appellant is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act and is borne on the file of the sales tax authority. The return for the assessment year 1983-84 was filed claiming certain exemptions. Appellant produced its books of accounts maintained in the course of its business. According to the appellant, the articles manufactured by the appellant did not require any mechanical power. The implements could either be used manually or drawn by animals. The assessing authority being of the view that the above implements are not agricultural implements and that the implements are to be drawn only by tractor, disallowed the exemption claimed by the appellant. The order of assessment was framed on October 31, 1986. Aggrieved against the order of assessing officer appellant filed an appeal before the first appellate authority which was accepted on March 12, 1987.

3. The Additional Commissioner, in exercise of his suo motu revisional jurisdiction under section 22-A of the Act, sent for the records of the first appellate authority on June 8, 1987 which were received in the Office of the Commissioner on June 10, 1987. The notice to the appellant was issued on March 22, 1994.

4. Section 22-A(1) and (3) which are relevant for determining the controversy between the parties are reproduced below :

"22-A. Revisional powers of Additional Commissioner and Commissioner. -

(1) The Additional Commissioner may on his own motion call for and examine the record of any proceeding under section 20 or section 21 of this Act and if he considers that any order passed therein by any officer who is not above the rank of a Joint Commissioner, is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, he may, if necessary, stay the operation of such order for such period as he deems fit and after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and after making or causing to be made such inquiry as he deems necessary, pass such order thereon as the circumstances of the case justify, including an order enhancing or modifying the assessment, or cancelling the assessment or directing a fresh assessment.

(2) ................

(3) The Additional Commissioner or the Commissioner shall not exercise any power under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), as the case may be, if -

(a) the time for appeal against the order has not expired;

(b) the order has been made the subject-matter of an appeal under section 22 or of a revision in the High Court; or

(c) more than four years have expired after the passing of the order sought to be revised.

5. According to the counsel for the appellant, the revisional authority could exercise its powers under section 22-A within four years of the passing of the order by issuing a notice to the appellant. As the order passed by the first appellate authority was on March 12, 1987, the jurisdiction under section 22-A could be exercised within four years from that date. The notice, annexure C, issued to the appellant is dated March 22, 1994, the same was clearly beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the Act. As against this, Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has argued that powers under sub-section (3) provides that Commissioner shall not exercise any powers under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), as the case may be, if more than four years have expired after the passing of the order sought to be revised. Powers under sub-sections (1) and (2) are initiated for due action by calling for examining the records of any proceedings under section 20 or 21 and since the revisional authority sent for the records on June 8, 1987, that is within four years of the passing of t