HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO TAX REVISION CASE No.299 OF 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)

Heard Mr. T.Chaitanya Kiran, learned Assistant Government Pleader representing Sri Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for State Tax, for the petitioner and perused the record.

2. The instant is the Tax Revision Case filed by the State under Section 22(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short “the Act”) read with Rule 10 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Rules, challenging the order dated 01.07.2009 passed in T.A.No.1268 of 2003 by the learned Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, (For short ‘the Tribunal’).

3. Vide the impugned order, the Tribunal had allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-Assessee setting aside the order of the revisional authority dated 18.09.2003 for the assessment year 1997-98.

4. The Tribunal had allowed the appeal filed by the Assessee holding that the order of the revisional authority was beyond the period of limitation prescribed under the Act. To better understand the question of limitation, it would be relevant at this juncture to refer to couple of dates relevant in this case. The order of assessment by the Assessing Officer was passed on 04.02.1999. The appeal preferred against the said order stood decided on 29.09.1999. The appellate authority had remanded the matter back for fresh assessment before the Assessing Officer. The revisional authority had passed the revisional order on 18.09.2003. The period of limitation for the revisional authority to exercise its original powers is four years. Section 20 (3) of the Act deals with the same, which for ready reference is reproduced hereunder:

“In relation to an order of assessment passed under this Act, the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) shall be exercisable only within such period not exceeding four years from the date on which the order was served on the dealer, as may be prescribed.”

5. A reading of aforesaid statutory provision if we look at the date of order on which the revisional authority had passed the order is of 18.09.2003. Four years would start from 04.02.1999 as such an order ought to have been passed on 03.02.2003 i.e. from the date of order. If proviso to sub-Section 3 of Section 20 of the Act is literally interpreted, the date of service of the assessment order is to be considered it would be 18.08.1999 and if that be so, fourth year is coming to an end on 17.08.2003.

The revisional authority had passed orders on 18.09.2003 which is much after the period of four years from the date of service of the assessment order. The statute does not provide any scope of relaxing the period of limitation beyond four years from the date of service of order of assessment. In the instant case, apparently, the revisional authority’s order is beyond four years from the date assessment order was passed and even also from the date the order was served upon the assessee.

6. In view of the same, the order passed by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with. So far as the ground of pleading Doctrine merger, we are not impressed by the argument of the petitioner-State. So far as the period of limitation is concerned, Section 20(3) of the Act reproduced in the preceding paragraphs clearly envisages the period of four years to be counted from the date the Assessing Officer’s order has been served upon the assessee. It does not say that it would start even from the date the appeal is decided against the order of Assessing Officer.

7. Against the appellate authority’s order there is only a remedy of further appeal to the Tribunal and not a revisional power. So the said ground of petitioner-State stands answered in the negative.

8. The Tax Revision Case fails and is accordingly rejected. No costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed.

_________________________________

P.SAM KOSHY, J __________________