TMI Blog1956 (1) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovember, 1949. During the first period the transactions of the applicants' firm were being conducted by one Gulbai. She transferred the said firm to one Ratanshi Sojpal on 3rd March, 1948. During the second period, Ratanshi Sojpal did not get himself registered as a dealer, and therefore obtained no registration certificate. On 6th November, 1949, the business was trans- ferred to the present part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was made thereon that the letter would be delivered by the Sales Tax Inspector at 56, Portuguese Church, Dadar, which appears to be the address of Ratanshi Sojpal. It was, however, received by Shri P.C. Mehta, one of the present partners of the firm. The said reminder called upon the firm to attend with their accounts on 28th January, 1950. On the said date, 28th January, 1950, one of the partner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 53, stated that as the transferee of Sojpal, they were liable to pay the sales tax dues under sub-section (1) of section 18 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, and demand- ed payment of the same. 2.. It was contended by Shri D.V. Patel for the applicants that the notice dated 2nd December, 1949, was never received by his clients and that if the reminder be regarded as a notice, the fact that it was tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of section 28 of the Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904. In this case the notice was not sent by registered post but by the ordinary post. As the applicants deny having received the notice, the presumption indicated by the words "shall be deemed to have been effected " in the said provision cannot, in our opinion, arise in this case, and there having been a special provision as to the cir- cums ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opportunity to be heard by the Sales Tax Officer who made the assessment, as held in our decision in Revision Application No. 19 of 1955, dated 27th July, 1955, must be held to have vitiated the proceedings held by the said officer so far as the applicants are concerned and the order of the assessment cannot, therefore, be allowed to stand against them. We, accordingly, allow the application and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
