TMI Blog1984 (7) TMI 87X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Gujarat is directed against the judgment of the High Court dismissing the Special Civil Application 629 of 1964 filed by the present appellants in which legality and validity of the two notices dated October 14, 1963 bearing No. 11/63 covering the period from July 15, 1963 to October 14, 1963 making a demand of Rs. 4,895.85 np and the second notice dated January 21, 1964 bearing No. 1/64 coverin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing an assessment having been made and therefore, the case would be governed by Rule 10 and not 10A. Consequently it was urged that the High Court was in error in holding that the case would be governed by Rule 10A. 4. The appellants moved the High Court soon after filing replies to the two notices but before adjudication by the statutory authority. Mrs Shroff, learned Counsel for the appellants ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. However, for the purpose of establishing that the demand was time-barred under Rule 10 it has to be proved that assessment of duty had been made. Mrs. Shroff urged with some vehemence that once appellants produced the gate pass the burden would be on the respondents to show that there was no assessment of duty prior to the issuance of the gate pass. She said that gate pass provides tangible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stigate the facts alleged on either side, the question whether notices were barred by limitation is kept open and the appellants will be at liberty to raise the contention before the statutory authorities. In other words, that point need not be taken as concluded by the decision in the writ petition and rejection of this appeal. With this reservation, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
