1989 (11) TMI 54 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of Section 39A of Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 regarding production of additional evidence, consideration of Government Notification No. 966-655-V-ST dated March 28, 1969 as evidence.

In this case, the assessee, a dealer in paints and hardware, had a best judgment assessment made due to not maintaining regular accounts. An appeal was filed against the assessment order claiming set-off under Section 8(1) of the Act for supplying material to Government Departments. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner rejected the claim due to missing necessary certificates. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that forms from a specific notification could be produced later. The Tribunal allowed the forms to be produced, remanding the case to the assessing officer. The central issue was whether the Government notification could be considered additional evidence under Section 39A. The High Court emphasized that a statutory notification is not factual evidence but part of the law, not subject to the restrictions of Section 39A. The Court held that the forms from the notification were integral to it and not separate evidence, thus the Tribunal was correct in considering them. The Court ruled in favor of the assessee, as the notification was a legal document that must be taken into account by those dealing with its subject matter. The judgment was given in favor of the assessee due to the nature of the notification and the legal principles involved. The legal position was accepted by the Revenue's counsel, leading to no costs being awarded.