TMI Blog1974 (1) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submitted by the petitioner. The notice of demand was served on him on 24th November, 1971. He applied on 29th December, 1971, for a copy of the assessment order which had not been furnished to him by the assessing authority. The copy of the assessment order was furnished to the petitioner on 21st January, 1972, and he preferred the appeal on 2nd February, 1972, before the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under section 20 of the Act. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dismissed the petitioner's appeal on two preliminary grounds, viz., (i) that the appeal had been preferred beyond the period of thirty days from the date of service of notice of demand, and (ii) that the appeal was not accompanied by satisfactory proof of payment of tax not disputed in the appeal. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred a second appeal before the Tribunal which reversed the decision of the Deputy Commissioner on the second ground, but affirmed his decision on the first ground of the appeal being barred by limitation. Aggrieved by that order of the Tribunal, the petitioner has preferred this revision petition. The Act confers on a dealer aggrieved by any order of assessment m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... les framed under the Act and the limitation for an appeal under section 20 commences from the date on which the notice in form 6 is served and that there is no provision either under the Act or the Rules requiring the furnishing of the assessment order giving reasons for such assessment along with form 6 notice. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied on an earlier judgment of this court in Giriyappa Setty Sons v. State of Mysore [1967] 19 S.T.C. 197. delivered by Hegde, J. That decision, no doubt, supports the contention of Sri Urs. In the said case, notice in form No. 6 had been served on the assessee on 13th August, 1958, and the appeal was filed only on 28th February, 1963, nearly five years after the service of notice in form No. 6. After setting out the notice in form No. 6, this is what Hegde, J., stated: ".......That notice purports to be a notice of final annual assessment and demand. No other form entitled as 'notice of assessment' was brought to our notice. In our opinion, form No. 6 combines a 'notice of assessment' as well as a 'notice of demand'. That being so, the service of notice in form No. 6 must be considered as a service of a 'notice of ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act which throws light on what was intended by the expression "notice of assessment". Section 12 occurs in Chapter V under the heading "Returns, assessment, payment, recovery, composition and collection of tax". Sub-section (1) of section 12 provides for submission of returns by every dealer. Sub-section (2) provides that if the assessing authority is satisfied that any return submitted under sub-section (1) is correct and complete, he shall assess the dealer on the basis thereof. Sub-section (3) provides "that if no return is submitted by the dealer under sub-section (1) before the date prescribed or specified in that behalf, or if the return submitted by him appears to the assessing authority to be incorrect or incomplete, the assessing authority shall assess the dealer to the best of his judgment, recording the reasons for such assessment" (underlining is ours). Assessment contemplated under section 12 is one either under sub-section (2) or under sub-section (3). The assessment under sub-section (2) is where the assessing authority accepts the return submitted by the dealer. The assessment under sub-section (3) is one where the assessing authority does not accept the return as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a v. Deputy Land Acquisition OfficerA.I.R. 1961 S.C. 1500., Gajendragadkar, J. (as he then was), who delivered the judgment of the Bench said: "Where the rights of a person are affected by any order and limitation is prescribed for the enforcement of the remedy by the person aggrieved against the said order by reference to the making of the said order, the making of the order must mean either actual or constructive communication of the said order to the party concerned. So the knowledge of the party affected by the award made by the Collector under section 12 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, either actual or constructive, is an essential requirement of fair-play and natural justice. Therefore, the expression "the date of the award" used in proviso (b) to section 18(2) of the Act must mean the date when the award is either communicated to the party or is known by him either actually or constructively. It will be unreasonable to construe the words from the date of the Collector's award used in the proviso to section 18 in a literal or mechanical way." In State of Punjab v. Qaisar Jehan BegumA.I.R. 1963 S.C. 1604., after reiterating the view of Gajendragadkar, J., S.K. Das, J., sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
