9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (1) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment year 1959-60. The facts leading to the filing of these two revisions are not in dispute, and therefore they may be briefly set out. The assessee is one Sait Goverchand Manchalal, a bullion merchant at Amalapuram. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, on the return submitted by the assessee for 1959-60, made an assessment on a net turnover of Rs. 96,000. The special staff of the commercial taxes department inspected the business premises of the assessee and found from a note-book seized on that occasion that he suppressed purchase of gold to an extent of about 1,294 tolas. On the basis of this suppression, the suppressed turnover was estimated at Rs. 1,35,932.25. A further verification revealed that on certain slips, transactio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings initiated by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, that the Commercial Tax Officer erred in issuing a notice to show cause why penalty should not be imposed even before the assessment was made on the escaped turnover and that the question of taking further action as to penalty will arise only after an order is made relating to the escaped turnover and not before an order is passed as to whether there was any escapement of turnover under sub-section (4) of section 14. We may, at the outset, observe that the argument of the learned counsel that the Commercial Tax Officer has no jurisdiction to act under section 14(4) in respect of assessment proceedings initiated by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer has no substance. To answer the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the turnover mentioned in the return the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer completed the assessments and made an order assessing the assessee to tax on that turnover, no appeal was preferred against that order of assessment with the result that so far as that assessment order was concerned, it became final. It should also be remembered that the question of invoking section 14(4) will arise only when it is found that the whole or any part of the turnover has escaped assessment to tax. It is the surprise inspection by the special staff that led to the discovery of a notebook and certain other slips showing the escaped turnover. The Commercial Tax Officer, therefore, issued a notice under section 14(4) on the basis of what the inspection discl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng authority may also be exercised by the revising authority referred to in section 20. To say that the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer alone is competent since the total turnover of the assessee did not exceed three lakhs of rupees, is to ignore the notification and the provisions of section 20, and sub-rule (5) of rule 31. It is not a case where before the assessment was completed by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer on the return submitted by the assessee the Commercial Tax Officer took over the assessment proceedings and then sought to act under sub-section (4) of section 14. It is a case where it was discovered, after the assessment was completed, that there was escapement of turnover, and the Commercial Tax Officer is competent to exerc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
