TMI Blog1967 (11) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly served. The service which was accepted by the assessing authority was affixation at a shop which used to be visited by the respondent. The shop was not his own and his place of residence was known. No attempt was made to serve the notice on him at his residence. In these circumstances, the proceedings taken ex parte against the respondent were not justified. - C.A. Nos. 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293 of 1967, - - - Dated:- 30-11-1967 - SHAH J.C. RAMASWAMI V. AND BHARGAVA V. JJ. K.C. Sud and Mohan Lal Aggarwal, for the respondents in C.A. Nos. 288 to 290 of 1967. Hardev Singh and R.N. Sachthey, for the appellants. Gokal Chand Mital and Janardan Sharma, for the respondent in C.A. No. 292 of 1967. ---------------- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in The State of Punjab and Others v. Tara Chand Lajpat Raj' and The State of Punjab and Another v. M/s. Murlidhar Mahabir Parshad'. In these cases, this Court, following the principle laid down in the case of Ghanshyam- das v. Regional Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Nagpur, has held that, if returns are filed by a registered dealer, or a notice is given any time before the expiry of the period of three years for the purpose of making a best judgment assessment, the actual assessment can be made even after the expiry of the period of three years. Mr. K. C. Sud, appearing on behalf of the respondents in Civil Appeals Nos. 288-290/1967, did not dispute that these appeals must be allowed and decided in favour of the appellants in v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddressed to the respondent, Banwari Lal Gupta, but it was not served personally on him. The service report shows that it was affixed at the shop of Messrs. Ram Dhari Mal Raj Kumar, Kat Mandi, Hissar, on the ground that Banwari Lal Gupta off and on visited this shop, even though the assessment order shows that the assessing authority knew that Banwari Lal Gupta is the son of Bhanna Ram and is the resident of a different village Surana Kheri. On these facts, learned counsel urged two grounds before us in support of the order passed by the High Court. The first ground was that, since in this case no return was actually filed by the respondent, who was not a registered dealer, within three years of the assessment year 1957-58, it should be he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to make best judgment assessment in respect of the quarters constituting the financial years 1955 and 1956, the last of which had expired on 31st March, 1956. All that was held by this Court in that case was that these notices of August 18, 1959, were futile as the notices were all given after the expiry of three years from the end of the periods in respect of which best judgment assessment was sought to be made. In the case of the respondent in C. A. No. 292/1967 now before us, as we have already indicated earlier, the notice for the best judgment assessment was issued on 8th March, 1961, and that was within three years of the period to which the assessment related. Consequently, on this ground, the assessment order cannot be quashed. H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
