Retrospective sales tax amendment required pre-amendment declared goods assessments to be reviewed under the revised statutory scheme.

A retrospective amendment to the Punjab General Sales Tax framework for declared goods required pre-amendment assessments to be reviewed and revised under the new scheme rather than sustained under the earlier invalid regime. The amendment introduced a specific stage of levy and a mandatory review power and duty under section 11AA, so assessments made under the unamended law had to be reconsidered afresh in accordance with the amended provisions. In the appeal where the High Court had quashed the assessment outright, that course was held inappropriate; the proper course was remand for reconsideration and revision under the amended Act.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the assessments of declared goods made under the unamended Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 could be sustained or had to be reviewed and revised in accordance with the amended scheme introduced by the Punjab General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1967; (ii) whether the High Court was right in quashing the assessment order in one appeal instead of directing reconsideration and revision.

Issue (i): Whether the assessments of declared goods made under the unamended Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 could be sustained or had to be reviewed and revised in accordance with the amended scheme introduced by the Punjab General Sales Tax (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1967.

Analysis: The unamended scheme of levy on declared goods had earlier been held illegal. The Amendment Act introduced a new and specific regime for declared goods, including a defined stage of levy and a mandatory review power and duty under section 11AA in respect of assessments made before the amendment. The Court held that those earlier assessments could not be confirmed on the footing of the pre-amendment law and that the assessing authority was bound to proceed under the amended provisions and reconsider the matters afresh.

Conclusion: The pre-amendment assessments could not stand as such and had to be reconsidered and revised under section 11AA and the amended Act.

Issue (ii): Whether the High Court was right in quashing the assessment order in one appeal instead of directing reconsideration and revision.

Analysis: The High Court's course in the particular appeal went beyond what was proper under the amended statutory scheme. Since the assessments had to be revisited under section 11AA, the correct course was to direct reconsideration and revision rather than to annul the assessment in toto. The Court therefore modified that result while leaving the matter open for fresh assessment in accordance with the amended provisions.

Conclusion: The assessment order in that appeal could not be quashed outright and had to be sent back for reconsideration and revision.

Final Conclusion: The appeals substantially failed for the State, and the assessments were left to be dealt with afresh under the amended statutory framework, with only a limited modification in the appeal where the assessment had been completely quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute introduces a new, retrospective scheme for declared goods and makes review of pre-amendment assessments mandatory, such assessments must be dealt with under the amended law and not sustained on the basis of the earlier invalid regime.

---