TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (4) TMI 212
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ich a reply was sent on 31st January, 1964. There were other notices which were issued by the department, which it is unnecessary to notice. It is enough to state that the firm was dissolved on 22nd August, 1962, and that the assessment was completed on 30th June, 1972. On these facts, the only contention that now survives for examination before us in this revision is whether the assessment completed on 30th June, 1972, was valid and proper. 2.. Counsel for the assessee contended that under the General Sales Tax Act, 1125, by which the proceedings for assessment are governed in this case as they were initiated while the said Act was in force, a dissolved firm cannot be assessed, and that the disability to assess continues even after the pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion turnover. That question falls to be decided on the relevant provisions of the Act. The provisions of the Indian Partnership Act regulating the relationship between the partners and their liability to third parties have, except in so far as those provisions are expressly or by necessary implication incorporated in the provisions of the Act, no relevance to the present appeal. The question also falls to be decided on the provisions of the Act as it stood in 1953. Further, we cannot discover any distinction in the matter of assessability of a dissolved firm between a case where the proceedings were initiated before and that after the said dissolution. We shall proceed, therefore, to consider the question irrespective of that distinction......
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on dissolution and, thereafter, on principle it cannot be assessed to sales tax unless the statute authorised it expressly or by necessary implication; (3) neither a provision requiring a dealer to inform the authorities of the discontinuance of business, nor one imposing a joint and several liability on the dealer and its partners for payment of tax or penalty can be interpreted as conferring jurisdiction to assess a dissolved firm; and (4) in interpreting a fiscal statute the court cannot proceed to make good the deficiencies, if any, in the statute (underlining* ours). As thus explained, it is enough if there is an express or implied provision to continue the assessment of a dissolved firm; and this is to be looked for in the statute un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 61 of the 1963 Act. It quoted also section 4 of the (Kerala) Interpretation and General Clauses Act, 1125. After quoting both the provisions, the Division Bench observed: Here italicised. "Reading the two provisions together, it seems to be quite clear that if a proceeding had been initiated under the 1125 Act before its repeal it will be deemed to have been initiated under the provisions of the 1963 Act and can be continued accordingly-see Cheru v. Sales Tax Officer, Ponnani1966 K.L.T. 902. But, if no proceeding had been initiated under the repealed Act, then the enforcement of the liability under the repealed Act can only be under the provisions of that Act and the Rules made thereunder-Arya Vaidya Pharmacy Ltd. v. State of Kerala....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proceeding" initiated under the provisions of the 1125 Act. But on the facts disclosed in the present case, we are clearly of the opinion that the proceedings for final assessment were initiated under the 1125 Act while the firm was a legal entity. That terminated in an assessment on 11th December, 1961, and the subsequent notices issued and the proceedings taken were clearly a continuation of the said proceedings. The fiction enacted by section 61 of the 1963 Act would deem these proceedings to be taken under the 1963 Act from their inception. This is of course subject to any right accrued, etc. But no right had accrued under the 1125 Act, as proceedings had been initiated before the dissolution of the firm. The position is clearly recogni....