TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (11) TMI 104
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Estate in Pasuppara, in the State of Kerala. For the assessment year commencing from April 1, 1987, the firm was assessed under section 3 of the Kerala Plantations Tax Act, 1960 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as "the 1960 Act"). Under assessment order dated September 6,1988, the said firm was assessed to tax at Rs. 130 per hectare for the period from April 1, 1987, to June 30, 1987, and at the revised rate of Rs. 350 per hectare for the remaining nine months period from July 1, 1987, to March 31, 1988. The said assessment was made pursuant to the substitution of Schedule I to the said 1960 Act by the Kerala Finance Act 18 of 1987, with effect from July 1, 1987. By the said amendment, the tariff in existence as on the first day of the financial year, viz., April 1, 1987, stood revised in the midst of the year with effect from July 1,1987. Consequently, in terms of the demand notice, the assessee was asked to pay the tax at the rate of Rs. 130 per hectare for the period April 1, 1987, to June 30, 1987, and at the rate of Rs. 350 per hectare for the period July 1, 1987, to March 31, 1988. Aggrieved, by the assessment order dated September 6, 1988, the said firm pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment year 1987-88; that the liability to pay the tax got crystallised on April 1, each year as mentioned in section 3(2); and consequently, assessment as per the new Schedule could be made only from the assessment year 1988-89. The appellant State then applied to this court and obtained special leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of the High Court. Mr. John Mathew, the learned advocate for the appellant herein, submitted that revision in the rates under the new Schedule with effect from July 1,1987, would not result in two assessments during the assessment year 1987-88; that the demand in question was for the differential tax and consequently, the question of two assessments during the same assessment year did not arise. He further contended that the object of enacting the State Finance Act 18 of 1987, was to give effect to the budget proposals for the financial year 1987-88; that the effect of substituting Schedule I with effect from July 1, 1987, was to revise the rates of plantation tax during the financial year 1987-88 and that object would stand defeated if the revised rates were held to be applicable on and from financial year 1988-89. The learned advocate subm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing authority may at any time, suo motu, revise the extent of plantation held by an assessee after hearing him. Under section 4(2), every assessee who, on the first day of the financial year holds two hectares or more of the lands in the plantation shall furnish to the assessing authority a return before the first day of June of that year. Under section 5, the assessing authority is authorised to determine the extent of plantation and the assessment of plantation tax. Section 6A deals with the cases of plantations escaping assessment. Section 8 deals with the authority of the assessing authority to serve notice of demand. Section 9 provides for an appeal against the order of assessment. Section 9A provides for reference to the District Court. Sections 13 and 14 deal with recovery. Schedule I refers to the rates of tax. Prior to April 1, 1987, it read as under: ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rates of plantation tax ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Where the aggregate extent of plan- Nil &nb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fect from the financial year 1968-69 and whereas the details available in this office show that you hold plantations to the extent shown below, it is hereby informed that you are assessed to pay plantation tax amounting to Rs.... under the said Act as amended by Act 19 of 1967. Notice is hereby given that you may file objections, if any, on the above assessment to the undersigned within fifteen days of receipt of this notice failing which the assessment shown above will be made absolute on the presumption that you have no objections to the above assessment." Thus, the scheme of the Act read with the rules framed thereunder indicates that section 3(1) is the charging section; that the subject of the charge is the extent of plantation held by an assessee on the first day of each financial year; that the tax is payable at the rates prescribed in Schedule I to the Act; that the tax assessed is payable for the financial year until the extent is revised; that even in the event of such revision, the tax assessed on the revised basis shall be payable only from the financial year immediately following such revision. This position is also made clear by Form No. IA quoted above under whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; One hundred per hectare on the extent of aggregate extent plantations in excess of two hectares; of plantations (other than coconut and arecanut)held by a person exceed two hectares but does not exceed four hectares 3. Where the (i) In the case of One hundred and aggregate extent plantations other fifty rupees per of plantations than coconut and hectare in excess held by a person arecanut of two hectares; exceeds eight hectares &n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; hectares 5. Where the (i) In the case of Two hundred and aggregate extent plantations other fifty rupees per of plantations than coconut and hectare in excess held by a person arecanut of two hectares; exceeds fifteen hectares but does not exceed twenty five hectares (ii) In the case of Two hundred and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to appreciate the contentions of the rival parties, one must bear in mind the essential components entering into the concept of a tax. In the case of Govind Saran Ganga Saran v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1985] 155 ITR 144 (SC); AIR 1985 SC 1041, this court has held that the first component in the concept of a tax is the character of imposition, the second is a clear indication of the person on whom the levy is imposed and who is obliged to pay the tax, the third is the rate at which the tax is imposed and the c fourth is the value to which the rate is applied for computing the tax liability. In the case of Goodyear India ltd. v. State of Haryana [1991] 188 ITR 402 (SC); AIR 1990 SC 781, it has been held that a taxable event is that which on its occurrence creates the liability to tax, which liability does not exist at a later point of time. Even though the taxable event of a tax happens to be at a particular point of time, the levy and collection of such tax may be postponed, for administrative convenience, to a later date. Thus, in the context of the Central Excise Act, 1944, even though the taxable event is the manufacture of an excisable article, the duty is levied and colle....