Statutory limitation for tax assessments cannot be revived by administrative permission unless the law clearly allows it.

Assessments for 1993-94 under the KGST and CST Acts completed on 30.7.1999 were held time-barred because the statutory limitation under Section 17(6) of the KGST Act had already expired on 31.3.1999, and later validating provisions did not apply to that year. The Court also held that permission under Section 17(7) could not extend limitation where it was granted without notice to the assessee and without material showing pending enquiry or investigation. Administrative permission could not revive an expired assessment period unless the statute clearly authorised it and the prescribed conditions were met.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessments for the year 1993-94 under the KGST and CST Acts completed on 30.7.1999 were barred by limitation. (ii) Whether the permission granted by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 17(7) of the KGST Act could extend the period of limitation.

Issue (i): Whether the assessments for the year 1993-94 under the KGST and CST Acts completed on 30.7.1999 were barred by limitation.

Analysis: Section 17(6) of the KGST Act introduced a time limit for completing assessments, and the amendments made from time to time extended the limitation only up to 31.3.1999 for assessments relating to the year 1993-94. The later validating provision in Section 17A and the validation clause in Section 3 of the Kerala Finance Act, 2000 did not apply to the assessment year 1993-94. The subsequent amendments relied on by the Revenue dealt with later assessment years and could not revive an assessment period that had already expired.

Conclusion: The assessments completed on 30.7.1999 were time-barred and the issue was decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the permission granted by the Deputy Commissioner under Section 17(7) of the KGST Act could extend the period of limitation.

Analysis: The extension under Section 17(7) could not be sustained because it was granted without notice to the assessee and there was no material to show that any enquiry or investigation was pending, which was a prerequisite for the exercise of that power. The power to enlarge or revive limitation was held to lie with the Legislature and not to be delegated in the manner attempted by the Department.

Conclusion: The Deputy Commissioner's permission could not extend limitation, and this issue was also decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: Both questions of law were answered in favour of the assessee, the assessments were held to be barred by limitation, and the revisions were rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Once the statutory period for completing an assessment expires, it cannot be enlarged by an administrative permission unless the statute clearly authorises such extension and the prescribed conditions for its exercise are satisfied.

---