Reassessment after repeal cannot bypass the later Act's limitation scheme by using an revisional power.

After repeal of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, the revenue could not use the old revisional power under section 31 to reopen escaped turnover for a pre-1959 period where the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 had already occupied the field through section 35. Section 77 continued the earlier law only subject to the later Act's reassessment and limitation scheme, so the attempted revision was treated in substance as reassessment and had to comply with the five-year limit under section 35. The argument based on the General Clauses Act failed because section 77 governed the effect of repeal, and section 35 was not confined to the original assessing authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after the repeal of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 by the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, the revenue could invoke the revisional power under section 31 of the 1953 Act to enhance a prior assessment in respect of a period before the commencement of the 1959 Act, despite the limitation scheme contained in section 35 of the 1959 Act.

Analysis: The earlier sales tax enactments provided separate schemes for reassessment and revision, with no limitation for suo motu revision, but the 1959 Act introduced a materially different structure. Section 77 continued the repealed laws for prior periods only subject to sections 35 and 42, and section 35 expressly governed reassessment of escaped turnover under any earlier law, prescribing a five-year period in the ordinary case. The impugned action, though styled as revision under section 31 of the 1953 Act, was in substance an attempt to bring escaped turnover to tax, and therefore fell within the field occupied by section 35. Since section 77 made continuation of the earlier law subordinate to section 35, the revenue could not bypass the limitation in section 35 by resorting to the old revisional provision. The argument based on section 7 of the Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904 was rejected because section 77 itself controlled the effect of repeal. The contention that section 35 could be used only by the original assessing authority was also rejected.

Conclusion: The respondent had no authority to proceed under section 31 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 in the manner attempted, and the notice was rightly quashed in favour of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a later sales tax statute expressly continues earlier repealed laws only subject to its own reassessment provisions, the revenue cannot invoke the earlier revisional power to achieve reassessment of escaped turnover and thereby avoid the limitation period fixed by the later Act.

---