TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1220
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion to contend that at least after the introduction of the third proviso there is a limitation provided, which indication has been made by the Full Bench in the concluding portion. Reference is also placed on the decision dated 05.10.2016 of a learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.21184/2016 and connected cases. 3. The limitation provided under Section 25(1) of the Act, is a period of five years from the last date of the year to which the return relates. The limitation, as per the words employed, is also to 'proceed to determine' to the best of judgment inter alia any escaped assessment to tax. The Full Bench has held that the words employed in sub section (1) indicates only an initiation of proceedings within the limitation period and not the conclusion of the assessment. 4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, first contends that there are two stages required insofar as proceeding to determine, as is evident from the provision; which are issuance of a notice and also an enquiry to be made. In the present case only the first stage has occurred before the limitation period and hence, there can be no enquiry made or proceedings continued after the limitation period, is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... specifically of the proviso by the Full Bench. 7. The proviso, as it reads, only indicates that completion of assessments including those in which an extension is made under Section 25B and expiring on 31.03.2015, would stand extended up to 31.03.2016. There is no limitation for completion of assessment provided therein. In the present case the assessment year is 2010-2011 and the limitation for initiating proceedings, under Section 25(1) expires only on 31.03.2016. The notice impugned herein is dated 19.03.2016; within the limitation period as provided under Section 25(1) of the Act. The argument is that the proviso deems conclusion of assessment within the extended period. 8. The proviso is a well-known devise of statutory construction, which cannot be interpreted as stating a general rule and creates either a qualification of or an exception from, what is stated in the substantive section or rule. It cannot be said to include or add what is not available in the original enactment. In Madras and Southern Maharatta Railway Co. vs. Bezwada Municipality - AIR 1944 PC 71. It was held so: "The proper function of a proviso is to except and deal with a case which would o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (1976) 1 SCC 128 = AIR 1975 SC 1758, declared: "If, on a fair construction, the principal provision is clear, a proviso cannot expand or limit it. Sometimes a proviso is engrafted by an apprehensive draftsman to remove possible doubts, to make matters plain, to light up ambiguous edges." [Para16] xxx xxx xxx The law is trite. A proviso must be limited to the subject-matter of the enacting clause. It is a settled rule of construction that a proviso must prima facie be read and considered in relation to the principal matter to which it is a proviso. It is not a separate or independent enactment. 'Words are dependent on the principal enacting words, to which they are tacked as a proviso. They cannot be read as divorced from their context' (1912 A.C. 544) If the rule of construction is that prima facie a proviso should be limited in its operation to the subject-matter of the enacting clause, the stand we have taken is sound. To expand the enacting clause, inflated by the proviso, sins against the fundamental rule of construction that a proviso must be considered in relation to the principal matter to which it stands as a proviso. A proviso ordinarily is bu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompletion of the assessment beyond the period specified in those Sections. Section 25(1) does not speak of any limitation for completion of the proceedings. In such circumstances, if at all extension of completion of assessment is permitted by the Deputy Commissioner, that would not enable the State to initiate proceedings after the limitation period is over nor can a limitation be found from the proviso. 19. This Court has, in W.P.(C) No.21314/2016 by judgment dated 03.10.2016, on the same reasoning, held that Section 25B, as it now stands, is redundant insofar as sub section (1) of Section 25 not providing for any limitation for conclusion of the proceedings. Para 7 and 8 are extracted hereunder: "7. Both the above provisions speak of extension of period of completion of assessment beyond the period specified. What is pertinent is that Section 25(1) of the K.V.A.T. Act does not provide for any period for completion of assessment and speaks of only initiation of proceedings to determine the escaped turnover to be commenced within the five year period. Hence, within the limitation period, if a notice is issued, the provisions under the K.V.A.T. Act does not provide for ....