Petitioner was a dealer under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act (the Act) on the rolls of the third respondent, presently migrated to the Goods and Services Tax regime. On 17.11.2017, the third respondent issued Ext.P1 notice to the petitioner for assessing the escaped turnover of the petitioner for the year 2011-'12. Ext.P2 is the reply sent by the petitioner to Ext.P1 notice. In Ext.P2 reply, among others, the petitioner contended that the proceedings is barred by limitation. The third respondent assessed the escaped turnover of the petitioner as proposed in Ext.P1 notice, ignoring the plea of limitation raised by the petitioner. Ext.P3 is the order passed by the third respondent in this connection. Ext.P3 order is though appealable under Section 55 of the Act, the petitioner challenges the same in this proceedings on the ground that the same is an order issued without jurisdiction.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner explicated the case set up by the petitioner pointing out that in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act, the proceedings for assessment of the escaped turn over of a dealer has to be initiated within five years from the last date of the relevant year and the period of five years made mention of in sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act, in the case of the petitioner, in relation to the assessment 2011-12 expired on 31.3.2017, the last date of the relevant year being 31.3.2012. It is conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in terms of Finance Act, 2017, the period 'five years' made mention of in sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act has been replaced by 'six years'. According to the learned counsel, the extended period introduced in terms of the Finance Act, 2017, cannot be availed of in the case of the petitioner for the assessment year 2011-12 as the statutory period for initiation of proceedings in the case of the petitioner for the year 2011-12 expired on 31.3.2017 before the date from which Finance Act, 2017, came into being viz, 1.4.2017.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader contended that the time limit prescribed for initiation of proceedings for assessing the escaped turnover of the dealers under the Act, which expires by 31.3.2017, has been extended upto 31.3.2018 by virtue of the third proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act introduced with effect from 01.04.2017 in terms of the Finance Act, 2017. In the light of the said provision, according to the learned Government Pleader, the plea of limitation raised by the petitioner is without substance.

5. I have examined the contentions raised by the learned counsel on either side. As rightly contended by the petitioner, prior to the Finance Act, 2017, the time limit prescribed for initiating proceedings for assessing the escaped turnover of a dealer under sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act was five years. The question, therefore, is whether the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act as amended from 01.04.2017, could be availed of by the competent authority for assessing the escaped turnover of the dealers under the Act for the year 2011-12. Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Act as it stands after the Finance Act, 2017 reads thus :

“Where for any reason the whole or any part of the turnover of business of a dealer has escaped assessment to tax in any year or return period or has been under-assessed or has been assessed at a rate lower than the rate at which it is assessable or any deduction has been wrongly made therefrom, or where any input tax or special rebate credit has been wrongly availed of, the assessing authority may, at any time within six years from the last date of the year to which the return relates, proceed to determine, to the best of its judgment, the turnover which has escaped assessment to tax or has been under assessed or has been assessed at a rate lower t