AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (3) TMI 475
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., who had State wide jurisdiction, inspected the business premises of the petitioner therein and issued notice alleging failure to keep true and complete accounts as also submission of untrue or incorrect returns constituting offences under S. 45a (b) and (d) of the Kerala general Sales Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". While replying to the notice, the petitioner inter-alia raised a contention that the inspecting Assistant Commissioner is not competent to initiate action under s. 45a because he was not having jurisdiction assigned to any local limits. Learned Single judge took the view that the fact that the officer who issued the notice is competent authority to initiate proceedings under S. 45a cannot be disputed. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 45a (1) is "the assessing authority" who includes, thanks to explanation II, any officer not below the rank of a Sales Tax Officer specified by Government notification in the Gazette. The notification Ext. P14 was intended for this purpose and thereby an Intelligence Officer also became an "assessing authority" entitled to impose penalty under S. 45a (1 ). But this by itself may not suffice to enable an Intelligence Officer to impose penalty under S. 45a (1 ). But his by itself may not suffice to enable an intelligence Officer to impose penalty anywhere in the State. The appointment of an Intelligence Officer is done by Government by virtue of the power vested in them by subsection (2) of S. 3, and, on such appointmen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, Adimali. The business place of the Company at Adimali was inspected by the Intelligence Officer (Investigation branch) and party attached to the office of the Deputy Commissioner (I), Trivandrum on 25-8-1993. They seized certain records. After verification of the accounts and seized r ecords with the shop inspection report the Intelligence Officer found defects and irregularities on the account. Notice was issued to the Company on 16-8-1994 calling for explanation as to why penalty should not be imposed under S. 45a of the Act. Company filed their reply dated 26-9-1994. Company did not avail of the opportunity to put forth their case on the dates on which the matter was posted for hearing. The Intelligence Officer thereupon issued Ext. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... so appointed, the latter part of the above clause says that they should perform the functions assigned to them within such limits as the Government may assign to them. According to us, the latter part of the clause is a restriction on the powers of the officers. If an officer has been appointed by the Government to exercise functions under the Act within certain local limits, then such officer can perform the duties within such limits and such limits only. The limitation on the jurisdiction of the officer is not to be read in a manner restricting the power of the Government to assign any function to an officer appointed as per the earlier part of the clause. According to us, S. 3 (2) of the Act empowers the Government to appoint officers a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Andhra Pradesh for making assessments under the Act. In other words the contention was, the Assistant commissioner of Intelligence and the Commercial Tax Officers, Intelligence, not being officers authorised to perform the functions within the local limits, have no jurisdiction to take any proceeding for making assessments or levy of tax and penalties. The Bench took the view that the impugned proceedings taken by the Assistant Commissioner of Intelligence or the Commercial Tax Officer, intelligence against the petitioners to make assessments are illegal and without jurisdiction. This view taken by the Bench in relation to orders of assessments passed by officers having State-wide jurisdiction cannot be of any assistance to us in decidin....