AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.N. Rao, J.—One Ms. Seethadevi, Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes was kept in full additional charge of the post of Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, by an order dated September 15, 1989 and with effect from that date she functioned in the capacity of Joint Commissioner till January 21, 1990. In exercise of her statutory power as Joint Commissioner, by an order dated October 23, 1989, she revised an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Challenging the revisional order passed by her the petitioner herein, a registered dealer under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal which by its order dated June 28, 1993, dismissed the appeal holding that Ms. Seethadevi during the period when she held full additional charge of the post of Joint Commissioner was fully competent to exercise revisional jurisdiction under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. Challenging the same the present T.R.C was filed u/s 22 of the Act.
Shri Srinivasa Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, has invited our attention to G.O. Rt. No. 232, Revenue (CT-1) Department dated February 13, 1990, wherein the Government declared that Ms. C. Seethadevi, Deputy Commissioner, was competent to exercise all the statutory powers of Joint Commissioner
"during her full additional charge of the post of Joint Commissioner"
and, therefore, the revisional orders passed by her would have legal effect only with effect from February 13, 1990, but not prior to that.
We are not inclined to agree with this contention. Exercise of statutory power by the person holding full additional charge of the post of Joint Commissioner does not depend upon any clarification issued by the State Government. u/s 4 of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, the State Government is empowered to appoint certain categories of officers including Joint Commissioners
"for the purpose of performing the functions respectively conferred on them by or under this Act."
It is not in dispute that the Joint Commissioner has power u/s 20 to revise the appellate orders passed by the Deputy Commissioners. When Ms. Seethadevi was appointed to be in full additional charge of the post of Joint Commissioner with effect from September 15, 1989, she was entitled in law to exercise the statutory power vested in her u/s 20 of the Act. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, therefore, has correctly held that the revisional order passed by Ms. Seethadevi does not suffer from any legal infirmity.
The T.R.C, therefore, fails and accordingly it is dismissed at the admission stage.
Petition dismissed.