AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 1016
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....P.(C) No.21314/2016 challenge an assessment order in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, on the plea raised of limitation; against the proceedings for reassessment made under Section 25(1) of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003 ('K.V.A.T. Act' for short), for assessment of escaped turnover. The Assessment Year is 2005-2006 and notices issued for reassessment under Section 25 (1) is Ext.P1 dated 12.08.2014. 2. The petitioner filed returns in accordance with Section 21 of the K.V.A.T. Act and the notice of reassessment was issued alleging escaped turnover on the basis of the subsidy and discount received, which the assessee claimed was not liable to be included in the total turnover. The appellate remedy was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. Therein the question raised was whether the completion of assessment has to be made within the time stipulated and it was found that there is no warrant for such an interpretation especially since the words employed was 'proceed to determine' which indicated only a proceeding to be initiated and not the assessment itself completed. Though the said declaration would have been against the assessee in that case, herein it enures to the benefit of the assessee. 5. The learned Special Government Pleader (Taxes), relying on Section 25B, introduced on 01.04.2013, contends an extension of the period having been made by virtue of the provision. The assessment order produced at Ext.P8 is specifically referred to, to urge that orders were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t 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 any period for completion of such assessment. In fact, the Full Bench noticed the Reference Order of the Division Bench which also emphasised the absence of a time frame to complete the assessment as provided under Section 25B of the K.V.A.T. Act. The Full Bench refused to answer the question; finding that it is not for the Courts to bring in a time frame and opined that suffice would be an observation that the completion should be within a reasonable period. 8. At the risk of repetition it has to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts in and the right to make assessment gets extinguished. In that case the extension itself was after three years from the last date prescribed for furnishing the reports and in that context the assessment was found to be beyond the period of limitation. 10. In the present case, the statute provides for self assessment and the provision for assessment of escaped turnover specifically provides a limitation of five years within which the proceedings to determine the escaped turnover had to be initiated. The power of extension conferred on the Deputy Commissioner was with respect to the completion of assessment, which has no relevance to the initiation of the proceedings as such. In such circumstance, Section 25B of the K.V.A.T. Act has to be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nding the matter all questions were left open. The assessments were directed to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment. 12. The Assessing Officer could have completed the assessment without issuance of a fresh notice since the proceedings were initiated prior to the limitation period. The Assessing Officer however thought it fit to issue a fresh notice for both the assessment years, respectively produced as Exts.P8 and P9 dated 25.04.2016 and 27.04.2016. The issuance of a fresh notice also would not have created any impediment in the assessment proposed as per the original notice within the limitation period. But, however, there were other aspects raised, including other instances ....