9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Challenge to best judgment assessment orders for the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71.
Analysis: - The petitioner contested the assessment on three grounds. Firstly, arguing that the computation of income based on deemed paddy receipt was erroneous. The petitioner contended that the actual receipt of agricultural produce should be the basis for assessment, not a deemed quantity. Citing a previous case, it was emphasized that what is actually received is crucial for computation. However, as no return was filed for the earlier year and no supporting documents were provided for the latter year, best judgment assessment under s. 25(5) was justified. The assessing authority must determine the income deemed to have been received by the assessee based on relevant circumstances, as it is impractical to ascertain the actual amount received. The court upheld the assessment, noting that the computation was based on quintals yield per acre from official records unchallenged by the petitioner. - Secondly, the petitioner argued that a significant portion of the property was sold, making the assessment on 25 acres inaccurate. However, since this fact was not presented to the Assessing Officer, there was no basis for the authority to consider the change in land possession. Therefore, the assessment order could not be faulted for not considering undisclosed information. - Lastly, the petitioner claimed that the lands were cultivated by bargadars, entitling them to 75% of the produce. The assessing authority, without evidence of bargadar possession, allowed the maximum permissible deduction for the owner. The court held that without proof of bargadar cultivation, the authority's decision was valid. Additionally, the petitioner's failure to appeal on factual matters further weakened the challenge. Consequently, all contentions were dismissed, and the rule was discharged with no costs awarded.
|
