1996 (2) TMI 528

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....which it has dismissed the second appeal and confirmed the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), maintaining the reassessment order passed under section 12 of the old Act in respect of the assessment year 1986-87. 2.. The facts of the case giving rise to this revision petition may be summarised thus. The petitioner sells medicines, drugs, pharmaceutical products and sanitary napkins. Regular assessment order relating to the assessment year 1986-87 was passed under section 10(3) of the old Act on June 3, 1988, taxing sanitary napkins at the residuary rate of 8 per cent. Notice under section 17 of the Act was issued in respect of the said assessment year for revising the rate from 8 per cent to 10 per cent in respect of sanitary napk....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tation and the authorities have not committed any error in passing/confirming the reassessment order. 5.. This revision can be disposed of on the point of limitation also. Admittedly, notice under section 12 of the old Act for the accounting period 1985-86 was issued on June 16, 1992. Its relevant assessment year was 1986-87. Section 12(2) of the old Act run as under:   "(2) No notice under sub-section (1) shall be issued in respect of any business, registration fee or exemption fee for any year after the expiry of eight years from the end of the relevant assessment year:" As already observed, notice under section 12 was issued on June 16, 1992 in respect of the assessment year 1986-87. The period of limitation for issuing not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r section 12 of the old Act. Notice under section 17(3) was to be issued in form S.T. 33 as required under rule 67(c) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1955 and the notice under section 12 was to be issued in form 12-A, as required in the rule 55-A of the said Rules. It is clear from their forms, S.T. 12-A and S.T. 33, that they were totally different notices. Service of notice in form S.T. 33 was not a compliance of section 12(2) of the old Act. It was not the case of wrong or incorrect mention of a provision of law. Thus, there is no force in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that earlier notice issued under section 17 of the old Act saved the limitation provided under section 12(2) of the old Act. 7.. It is cle....