2010 (4) TMI 1013

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g questions of law for adjudication by this court: "(i) Whether Excise and Taxation Officer (Anti-Evasion Squad) was an appropriate Assessing Authority for the respondent in view of the notification dated May 19, 1989 read with the definition of appropriate Assessing Authority under clause (c) of rule 2 of the Rules and whether Excise and Taxation Officer (Anti-Evasion Squad) had concurrent jurisdiction to act as an Assessing Authority with the officer in whose circle the respondent was located and was competent to assess the respondent? (ii) Whether the judgment of the honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Devi Dass Gopal Krishan v. State of Punjab [1973] 31 STC 536 was contrary to the judgment of the apex court in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) does not have the concurrent jurisdiction and therefore, was not competent to assess the dealer being "not an appropriate Assessing Authority" under rule 2(c) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975. The Tribunal vide its order dated April 17, 2002, quashed the orders passed by the Assessing Authority as well as the order of the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that the Assessing Authority was not the appropriate authority to assess the assessee. Thereafter, an application for referring the matter to the High Court was filed by the Revenue which has been allowed and the matter has been referred to the High Court. Counsel for the Revenue has submitted that a perusal of notification dated May 19, 198....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he learned counsel, therefore, submits that the orders passed by the Assessing Authority as well as the appellate authority were in consonance with the notification dated May 19, 1989. On the other hand, the arguments raised by the counsel for the Revenue have been controverted by Mr. Krishan Mehta, counsel for the assessee, who submits that the Excise and Taxation Officer (Anti-Evasion Squad) was not the officer who had the necessary jurisdiction of the circle in question and hence he did not have the jurisdiction.   We have heard the counsel for the parties at length and find that the language of the notification dated May 19, 1989, is itself absolutely clear, whereby the Government of Haryana has appointed the Excise and Taxat....