Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →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 revisional authority could invoke section 9 of the Maharashtra Purchase Tax on Sugarcane Act, 1962 to levy interest under section 7B when the original assessing authority had not passed any order levying interest.
Analysis: Section 7B imposed liability to interest on default in filing returns or payment of tax, while section 9 empowered revision of an existing order made under the Act. The original assessment orders did not levy interest under section 7B, nor did they reserve the question of interest for future decision. In the absence of any order, express or implied, on the levy of interest, there was nothing available for revision. Revisional power could not be exercised as an original power to impose interest afresh.
Conclusion: The revisional authority lacked jurisdiction to levy interest in the absence of an order passed by the assessing authority under section 7B, and the impugned orders were quashed. The writ petition succeeded.
Final Conclusion: The demand of interest was held to be without jurisdiction because revision under the Act presupposed an order capable of being revised.
Ratio Decidendi: Revisional jurisdiction under a taxing statute can be exercised only against an existing order, and it cannot be used to create an original liability where the assessing authority has passed no order on the subject.