9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 1053X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. 932 of 2010-11 dated October 13, 2011, has claimed that the following substantial questions of law would arise for determination: "(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal is a non-speaking order? (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, a service of notice on an unknown person not related to the business of the dealer is a valid service of a notice? (iii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the report of the taxation peon dated November 7, 2010 which has been relied upon in order dated April 20, 2010 is a legal evidence of service of notice? (iv) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the service of penalty notice during the assessment proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... impugned herein dated October 13, 2011. This has necessitated the appellant to approach this court claiming determination of substantial questions of law, as noticed above. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that under rule 79 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Rules, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as, "the Rules"), notice could be served by delivery by hand to the assessee or his agent or a person regularly employed by him in connection with the business or any adult member of his family residing with him. It was submitted that notice for April 20, 2010 was never received by any of the aforesaid designated persons and the report of the process server, on the basis of which finding was recorded by the first and second appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the Act or these rules shall be served by one of the following methods,- (a) by delivery by hand a copy of the notice to the addressee or to his agent or to a person regularly employed by him in connection with the business in respect of which he is registered as a dealer or to any adult member of his family residing with the dealer;" 8. A bare reading of the aforesaid provision clearly spells out that in order to have a valid service of notice under the Act or the Rules, one of the methods prescribed under sub-rule (1)(a) of rule 79 of the Rules is by delivery by hand to the assessee or to his agent or to a person regularly employed by him in connection with the business in respect of which he is registered as a dealer or to any a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ements envisaged thereunder. Adverting to the judgment relied upon, suffice it to notice that the same being based on individual factual matrix involved therein does not advance the case of the respondent-State. 12. Accordingly, it is held that the order dated April 20, 2010 passed by the Assessing Authority imposing penalty under section 38 of the Act was without affording any opportunity of hearing to the appellant. Consequently, the substantial questions of law are decided in the manner indicated above. It is, however, observed that the Assessing Authority shall be at liberty to pass a fresh order under section 38 of the Act after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant in accordance with law. The appellant shall appear bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
