Rank requirement for provisional assessment under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act rendered lower-authority action without jurisdiction.

After the amendment to section 28(6) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, a provisional assessment could not be authorised by an intelligence officer below the rank of the dealer's assessing authority. The amended provision required the acting officer to be of at least the same rank and confined provisional assessment to the statutory framework introduced by Act 26 of 2004. As the petitioner's assessing authority was the Deputy Commissioner and the authorisation was granted to a lower-ranking officer after the amendment took effect, the authorisation contravened the statute. The provisional assessment orders were therefore quashed as without jurisdiction, with liberty reserved to place the materials before the assessing authority for action in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after the amendment to section 28(6) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, a provisional assessment could validly be authorised and made by an intelligence officer below the rank of the dealer's assessing authority, and whether the resulting provisional assessment orders were without jurisdiction.

Analysis: Section 28(6), as amended by Act No. 26 of 2004, introduced a restriction that the officer taking action under that sub-section shall not be below the rank of the assessing authority of the dealer. The amended scheme also limited provisional assessment to within 180 days from seizure and contemplated recovery of tax pursuant to such assessment. On the facts, the petitioner's assessing authority was the Deputy Commissioner, while the officer authorised to act was below that rank. Since the permission to proceed was granted after the amendment came into force, the authorisation contravened the amended statutory requirement. The provisional assessments made thereafter were therefore not sustainable in law.

Conclusion: The authorisation and the provisional assessment orders were quashed as being without jurisdiction, and liberty was reserved for the intelligence authority to place the materials before the assessing authority for assessment or reassessment in accordance with law.

---