9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (11) TMI 139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to know that proceedings under that provision had been initiated. The petitioner wrote to the Sales Tax Officer pointing out that no notice under section 21 had been served upon him and the period of limitation of four years from the end of 1960-61 having run out, the proceedings were without jurisdiction. Aggrieved by these proceedings, the petitioner now claims certiorari against them and prohibition restraining the respondents from continuing those proceedings. Another relief sought by the petitioner is that the third respondent, the Sales Tax Officer (Special Investigation Branch), Kanpur, be directed to return the documents and papers which had been seized from the custody of the petitioner. It appears that the Sales Tax Officer issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner was not on the business premises when the peon went there and, therefore, it cannot be said that the notice was served in accordance with the mode prescribed by clause (a). Clause (b) is in these terms: "(b) if such dealer .... or his manager or agent cannot easily be found, by leaving a copy thereof at his last known place of business or residence, or by giving or tendering it to some adult member of his family." Now, there is nothing in the counter-affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents to show that the dealer could not easily be found. Merely because the peon went to the business premises and did not find the dealer present does not mean that the dealer could not easily be found. It does not appear that any attempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rvant of the sales tax department and not through the intervention of the postal or telegraphic authorities. If the construction suggested by Mr. Shukla is accepted, it would lead to the result that the provisions of clause (d), which enable the Sales Tax Officer to effect service by sending a copy to the dealer by registered post, would be rendered redundant. Rule 77 enables service to be effected through the intervention of external agency only in one mode, and that is by registered post. It has not been provided that such service can be effected also by telegram. Accordingly, for all these reasons I am of opinion that the telegram despatched on 31st March, 1965, was not one of the modes of service contemplated by rule 77. Some argume ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
