Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the period of five years prescribed in section 57 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 for the Commissioner to act on his own motion applies only to the initiation of revisional proceedings by calling for the record, or whether the entire revisional process including passing of the final order must be completed within that period.
Analysis: The statutory language contemplates a composite revisional process consisting of calling for the record, examining it and passing such order thereon as the Commissioner thinks just and proper. The limitation is attached to the commencement of revision, namely, the point when the Commissioner calls for the record, and not to the completion of the entire proceeding. The legislative history, including the earlier absence of limitation and the subsequent short period introduced and amended by the Legislature, supports this construction. A contrary view would create anomalies and frustrate the purpose of the revisional power.
Conclusion: The five-year period under section 57 applies only to the initiation of revisional proceedings by calling for the record, and it is not necessary that the final revisional order be passed within that period.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute fixes a limitation period for a revisional authority to act on its own motion, the period governs the initiation of revision when the record is called for, unless the statute clearly requires completion of the entire revision within that time.