Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court Invalidates Tax Officers' Jurisdiction, Deems Assessments Unauthorized

        Sri Balaji Rice Company Versus Commercial Tax Officer, No. I, Nellore

        Sri Balaji Rice Company Versus Commercial Tax Officer, No. I, Nellore - [1984] 55 STC 292 (AP) Issues Involved:

        1. Jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioners (Intelligence) and Commercial Tax Officers (Intelligence) to assess dealers.
        2. Arbitrary and discriminatory nature of the assessment powers conferred.
        3. Retrospective effect of the conferment of assessment powers.
        4. Applicability of assessment powers to cases of disclosed turnovers and claimed exemptions.

        Summary:

        Issue 1: Jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioners (Intelligence) and Commercial Tax Officers (Intelligence) to assess dealers.

        The petitioners argued that u/s 4 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, the officers could only perform functions within assigned local limits and not throughout the entire State of Andhra Pradesh. The court agreed, stating that "local limits" must mean a limited area and not the whole state. Therefore, the notifications issued by the Commissioner allocating jurisdiction over the entire state to these officers were ultra vires and without jurisdiction.

        Issue 2: Arbitrary and discriminatory nature of the assessment powers conferred.

        The court found that the plurality of officers conferred with assessment powers without clear guidelines led to arbitrary and discriminatory practices. The lack of a clear appellate remedy for assessments made by the Assistant Commissioners (Intelligence) and Commercial Tax Officers (Intelligence) further exacerbated this issue. The court held that this was violative of the petitioners' rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.

        Issue 3: Retrospective effect of the conferment of assessment powers.

        The court held that the Government had no power u/s 2(1)(b) to authorize officers with retrospective effect. The notification G.O. No. 1059 dated 27th July 1982, which purported to confer powers retrospectively, was deemed ultra vires. Consequently, any assessments made by these officers before the notification date were illegal and without jurisdiction.

        Issue 4: Applicability of assessment powers to cases of disclosed turnovers and claimed exemptions.

        The court did not express a final opinion on whether the powers conferred could extend to cases where turnovers were disclosed, and exemptions were claimed but disallowed by the assessing authority. However, it noted that this issue would depend on the specific facts of each case.

        Additional Points:

        W.P. No. 5864 of 1982: The assessment order made by the Commercial Tax Officer, Intelligence-III, Hyderabad, on 5th March 1982, was deemed illegal as it was made before the conferment of powers by G.O. No. 434 dated 30th March 1982. The garnishee order passed on 6th October 1981 was also held illegal as there were no arrears of tax or penalty at that time.

        W.P. No. 8739 of 1982: The show cause notice proposing a provisional assessment by the Assistant Commissioner, Intelligence, Kurnool, was deemed illegal as a final assessment had already been made by the local Commercial Tax Officer. The collection of compounding fees by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Kurnool, was also held illegal as it was outside his territorial jurisdiction.

        In conclusion, all the writ petitions were allowed with costs, and the impugned proceedings were quashed as illegal and without jurisdiction.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found