Summary
The Supreme Court held that Section 21 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993, which permits an assessment within four years of the expiry of limitation with the Commissioner's prior sanction, applies only where no assessment at all was made within the time limits of Section 19; it cannot be used to revive assessments already held to be time-barred. The High Court's contrary reading was set aside and the appeals allowed.
Issues
- Whether, after assessments for 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 were held time-barred under Section 19 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993, the revenue could obtain the Commissioner's sanction and make a fresh assessment under Section 21 of that Act.
- How the time limits in Sections 19 and 21 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 are to be construed.
Provisions considered
- Section 19, Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993Section 19 fixes the time limits for completing assessments and re-assessments (three years from the end of the relevant year for an assessment under Section 17, with shorter periods for re-assessment under Section 18). The Court treated the earlier assessments for the three years as already held invalid for being beyond these limits. (¶¶ 10, 13)
- Section 21, Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993Section 21 allows an assessment within four years from the expiry of the Section 19 limitation period with the Commissioner's prior sanction, but only 'where no assessment has been made under any of the foregoing provisions' within the Section 19 limits. The Court held it has no application where assessments were in fact made and then struck down as time-barred, so the sanction obtained later could not bring the reassessment within time. (¶¶ 11, 12, 13)
Held
- Section 21 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 applies only in cases where no assessment has been made under any provision of the Act within the time limits specified in Section 19. Where assessments for the relevant years were made and held invalid as time-barred under Section 19, the revenue cannot, by subsequently obtaining the Commissioner's sanction, take recourse to Section 21 to make a reassessment within four years. The High Court's interpretation of the two provisions was incorrect. (¶¶ 12, 13)
- In construing fiscal statutes and determining a subject's liability to tax, regard must be had to the strict letter of the law. Tax can be imposed only if the case falls strictly within the provisions of the taxing statute; it cannot be imposed by inference, by analogy, or by probing the legislature's intention or the substance of the matter. (¶ 14)
Result
Appeals allowed; the common judgment and order of the Gauhati High Court dated 21.09.2012 set aside; pending applications disposed of.