Assessing authority power under Kerala sales tax law includes penalty jurisdiction and is not limited to the file-handling officer.

An Intelligence Officer already authorised as an assessing authority under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act was competent to impose penalty under section 45-A(1), because the statutory expression "assessing authority" was read with the earlier general authorisation and Explanation II only added another inclusive route for notified officers. The penalty power was also not confined to the particular officer handling the assessee's assessment file; any authorised assessing authority could exercise it independently of pending assessment proceedings. The jurisdictional challenge therefore failed, and the penalty-related orders were sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an Intelligence Officer appointed and empowered as an assessing authority under sections 2(iv) and 3(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 could impose penalty under section 45-A(1). (ii) Whether the power under section 45-A could be exercised only by the particular officer entrusted with the assessee's assessment file.

Issue (i): Whether an Intelligence Officer appointed and empowered as an assessing authority under sections 2(iv) and 3(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 could impose penalty under section 45-A(1).

Analysis: The expression "assessing authority" in section 45-A(1) was read with sections 2(iv) and 3(2), under which the Government had already authorised the officer to function as an assessing authority. Explanation II to section 45-A(1) was held to be an additional inclusive provision, bringing in other officers not below the rank of Sales Tax Officer by separate notification, and not a provision that displaced the earlier general authorisation. The 1963 notification therefore remained effective and sufficient to confer power to act under section 45-A as well.

Conclusion: Yes. The officer was competent to impose penalty under section 45-A(1).

Issue (ii): Whether the power under section 45-A could be exercised only by the particular officer entrusted with the assessee's assessment file.

Analysis: The Court rejected the attempt to narrow the statutory power to the officer handling the assessment record. Any officer falling within the class of authorised assessing authorities under sections 2(iv) and 3(2) was competent to act under section 45-A in respect of the persons covered by that provision, and the power was not confined to the officer dealing with the pending assessment proceedings. The penalty power was also capable of being exercised independently of assessment proceedings.

Conclusion: No. The power was not confined to the particular file-handling officer.

Final Conclusion: The impugned penalty-related orders were sustained on the ground that they had been made by a competent authority, and the assessees' challenge failed on the jurisdictional issue.

Ratio Decidendi: A general authorisation making an officer an assessing authority under the Act also equips that officer to exercise penalty power under section 45-A, and Explanation II does not curtail or supersede that pre-existing authority.

---