Nagaraja Overseas Traders Vs. the State of Mysore

- limitation act (36 of 1963)section 5: [n.k.patil,j] order rejecting application for re-grant of inam property appeal against was filed after inordinate delay of 23 years explained by petitioners saying that they came to know about impugned order only after 23 years however, no statement made as to their source of information held, explanation offered by petitioners does not inspire confidence of court. petitioners duty bound to explain delay satisfactorily by assigning cogent reason and showing bona fide. delay not condoned. - 98 at 101.), that 'if the exemption of the turnover was improper, then the matter is not one for proceeding under section 12-a but under section 21 of the act as stated earlier and that section 21 empowers the revisional authority to revise the orders passed by the subordinate authorities, if on examination of the record, the revisional authority is satisfied that the order of the subordinate authority is not legal or proper'.following the said decision, this revision petition is allowed and the order of the tribunal made in s.ordergovinda bhat, c.j. 1. the petitioner was an assessee to tax under the mysore sales tax act, 1957, for the assessment year 1964-65. the commercial tax officer who made the order of assessment in the first instance, granted deduction of an amount of rs. 4,78,600.00; but later on he issued a notice under section 12-a of the act and made an order of assessment on the said turnover on the ground that the same has escaped assessment. appeals preferred by the assessee to the deputy commissioner of commercial taxes and later to the mysore sales tax appellate tribunal, bangalore, were dismissed. 2. the only question that arises for decision is, whether the assessing authority had jurisdiction to bring the turnover in dispute to tax under section 12-a of the act. section 12-a empowers the assessing authority to bring to tax an escaped turnover. when the turnover was already before the assessing authority when he made the first order of assessment, the said turnover cannot be said to be an escaped turnover. in such cases, the order granting deduction or exemption has to be corrected in revision under section 21 of the act. this court has held in chikanarasimhiah v. assistant commissioner of commercial taxes, bangalore city division, bangalore ([1971] 28 s.t.c. 98 at 101.), that 'if the exemption of the turnover was improper, then the matter is not one for proceeding under section 12-a but under section 21 of the act as stated earlier and that section 21 empowers the revisional authority to revise the orders passed by the subordinate authorities, if on examination of the record, the revisional authority is satisfied that the order of the subordinate authority is not legal or proper'. following the said decision, this revision petition is allowed and the order of the tribunal made in s.t.a. no. 419 of 1968 is hereby reversed. 3. the petitioner is entitled to its costs. advocate's fee rs. 100. 4. petition allowed.