Jurisdiction once validly assumed is not divested by a later notification conferring power on another assessing authority.

Under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and Rules, jurisdiction of the assessing authority depends on the Commissioner's area allocation and distribution of business, and the Commercial Taxes Officer or Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer may act where jurisdiction exists for the time being. Where the Commercial Taxes Officer had already filed returns, handled earlier years, and issued the assessment notice before a later notification conferred pecuniary jurisdiction on the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer, that later notification did not divest the first officer of jurisdiction to complete the assessment. The assessment was therefore not without jurisdiction, and the contrary view was incorrect.

---

---

Issues: Whether the subsequent notification conferring pecuniary jurisdiction on the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer divested the Commercial Taxes Officer of jurisdiction to complete the assessment after he had already issued notice and assumed jurisdiction.

Analysis: The expression "assessing authority" under section 2(b) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954, is the Commercial Taxes Officer or Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer having jurisdiction for the time being. Under Rule 3(1), Rule 2(d) and Rule 4 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1955, jurisdiction is regulated by the Commissioner's allocation of area and distribution of business where more than one officer functions in the same circle. On the facts, returns had been filed before the Commercial Taxes Officer, he had dealt with earlier years, and he had issued the notice for the relevant assessment year when the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer had no pecuniary jurisdiction. The later notification of 24 June 1977, which extended jurisdiction up to Rs. 7 lakhs, did not operate to divest the Commercial Taxes Officer of the jurisdiction already validly assumed by issuance of notice. The assessment could not therefore be treated as without jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The Commercial Taxes Officer retained jurisdiction and the Tribunal's contrary view was incorrect.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessing authority has validly assumed jurisdiction by issuing notice before a later jurisdictional notification, the later conferment of jurisdiction on another authority does not, by itself, divest the first authority of jurisdiction to complete the assessment.

---