Limitation and fresh material control reassessment of sales tax assessments; stale reopening was struck down as without jurisdiction.

Reassessment or revision of concluded sales tax assessments must rest on legally permissible material and be initiated within the statutory limitation period. Here, the impugned notices were in a common cyclostyled form, disclosed no independent enquiry or fresh material, and relied on information already available when the earlier assessments were made. The Madras HC held that reopening on stale or extraneous material after expiry of the prescribed period for escaped turnover was without jurisdiction. The notices and revisional order were therefore unsustainable and were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned notices and order initiating reassessment or revision of concluded sales tax assessments were without jurisdiction and barred by limitation.

Analysis: The notices were found to be in a common, cyclostyled form and did not show any independent enquiry or new material justifying reopening. The earlier assessments of the sellers stood intact, and the same materials had already been available to the assessing authority. The Court applied the settled principle that revisional or reassessment powers under the sales tax law must operate within the statutory limits, including the prescribed period for bringing escaped turnover to tax, and cannot be exercised on extraneous or stale material after the limitation period has expired.

Conclusion: The impugned notices and order were held to be wholly without jurisdiction and unsustainable. The writ petitions were allowed and the impugned proceedings were quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment or revision of escaped turnover cannot be sustained unless it is based on legally permissible material and is initiated within the statutory period of limitation; action taken beyond that limit is without jurisdiction.

---