9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (4) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the petitioner filed three additional sets of court fee to regularise the defect. The petitioner seeks to challenge the validity of four assessment orders. The petitioner has now paid four sets of court fees. The position is as if there were four writ petitions seeking to set aside the four assessment orders. The petitioner commenced the business of manufacture and sale of buckles at Aligarh in or about December, 1960. This business continued till December, 1962, when it is alleged to have been suspended. In or about August, 1962, Sri V.D. Singh was one of the Assistant Sales Tax Officers at Aligarh. On 10th of August, 1962, he came to the petitioner's business premises in order to make a survey for the purpose of assessment of sales tax. Some altercation took place between Mr. Singh and the petitioner and his father. Mr. Singh lodged a report with the police authorities with respect to this incident. He appears to have gone again with police force and conducted a survey of the petitioner's business. He inspected the petitioner's account books and signed them at various places. The inspection was done only on 10th August, 1962, but Sri Singh dated some of his signatures as 10th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner (J.) Sales Tax, Aligarh Range, Aligarh, by his judgment dated 6th January, 1964, allowed all the four appeals, set aside the assessment orders and remanded the cases back for fresh assessments according to the directions given by him. He observed that the Assistant Sales Tax Officer has not mentioned any material evidence or ground on which he came to the conclusion that the sales have taken place during 1960-61 and that for the year 1961-62 no proper basis for the determination of turnover has been mentioned and that the turnover determined appears to be arbitrary, and not connected with the relevant facts. He directed that fresh assessment should be made after making a proper and detailed enquiry into the nature and extent of the petitioner's business. Similarly the appeal against the assessment for the first quarter of 1962-63 was allowed and the matter remanded by an order which was passed in September, 1963. When this case came back to the file of the same officer, viz., Sri V.D. Singh, the petitioner made an application for its transfer. The Commissioner, Sales Tax, dismissed this application on 13th January, 1964, with the observation: "Let applicant apply to the A.C. ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 10,800. The petitioner states that the assessment orders have been passed in gross violation of the directives given by the appellate remand order. It also states that the assessment orders are substantially a repetition of the previous assessment orders except for the figures of the turnover. The assessment orders are passed substantially on the survey conducted by Sri V.D. Singh on 10th August, 1962. Paragraph 20 of the writ petition states that 10th August, 1962, was a Friday and a closed day and that this fact was noted in the register which was signed by Sri Singh. It is also stated that on that day the establishment was closed under the provisions of the U.P. Shops and Commercial Establishments Act and neither any machine was working, nor any mechanic was working, and the statement to the contrary in the assessment orders is patently false. Sri V.D. Singh in paragraph 20 of his counter-affidavit stated that the allegations made in paragraph 20 of the writ petition are wrong and are denied. No further details are given as to whether the entire contents of paragraph 20 are wrong or only some of them. From a perusal of the calendar of 1962 it appears that 10th of August, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hen a person acts as a party and as a judge in the same cause, in his official capacity sits in appeal over his own judgment. Personal bias is suggested by attributed inter alia bad faith or ill-will operating in the mind of the tribunal as against the litigant or where the officer is (1) A.I.R. 1957 S.C. 425. (2) A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 468. acting with a view to satisfy some private or personal grudge against the litigant. In such cases it becomes necessary to see whether there is reasonable ground for assuming the possibility of a bias because a man's state of mind is very difficult to prove by direct evidence. Hence it is pertinent to enquire whether the circumstances and the facts are such as are likely to produce in the mind of the litigant, a reasonable doubt about the fairness of the concerned officer or tribunal. In S. Partap Singh v. State of Punjab(1), it was held that if the act is in excess of the power granted or is an abuse or misuse of power, the matter is capable of interference and rectification by the court. In such an event the fact that the authority concerned denies the charge of mala fides, or asserts the absence of oblique motives or of its having taken into consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner's statement supported as it was by an affidavit that he wished to approach the High Court was not genuine. Sri V.D. Singh passed best judgment assessments up to his jurisdictional limit against the petitioner on a turnover of Rs. 40,000 in the first instance and on a turnover of Rs. 60,000 after remand, on practically the same materials. All these facts make it clear that Sri V.D. Singh had a personal bias against the petitioner. He, therefore, could not have taken part in the assessment proceedings. The assessment orders are, for these reasons, vitiated and are null and void. It was urged for the respondent that the doctrine of bias is excluded in a case of necessity, that is, where the statute confers jurisdiction only on one officer and no other officer has jurisdiction. Section 7 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act confers jurisdiction on "the assessing authority" to assess a dealer to sales tax. Section 2(a) defines an "assessing authority" to mean any person authorised by the State Government to make an assessment. Rule 2(4) of the Rules framed by the State Government under this Act defines "Sales Tax Officer" to mean a Sales Tax Officer of a circle appointed by the State Govern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
