9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (9) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) "the case as again come before me today for assessment after substituted service of the memo notice has been effected by the Taxation Sub-Inspector himself by affixing the copy of the same to his business premises." (iii) "....................but it established that the dealer did work his stone crushing machine during this period and transacted business and also on basis of local enquiries and to best of judgment, I determine his gross turnover at.............." (iv) "His chargeable purchases of stone, lubricants and electricity are determined to best of judgment, on the basis of local enquiries at ................." When this writ petition was filed on 5th December, 1963, a prayer had been made in it to quash the assessment order annexure "C" relating to the financial year 1959-60 as well as the assessment orders, copies of which are annexures "A" and "B" to the writ petition, which related to two previous years. At the time of the motion hearing of the petition on 6th December, 1963, the petitioner proposed to confine the relief claimed by him in this case to the assessment order dated 22nd March, 1963, for the year 1959-60 copy of which is annexure "C" to the writ petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rther held in that case that where the last of the quarters in respect of which the assessee has filed his returns ended on 31st March, 1956, the Assessing Authority could not proceed to make a best judgment assessment in respect of that quarter after 31st March, 1959. The relevant phraseology of sub-sections (4) and (5) of section 11 of the principal Act is the same. It is, therefore, obvious that if the requisite steps are not proved to have been taken by the Assessing Authority in respect of the quarter March to June, 1959, before the 1st of June, 1962 and so on, the assessment order in respect of those quarters made after the expiry of three years from the last day of the relevant quarter has to be held to be without jurisdiction. The return to the rule issued in this case was filed on behalf of the respondents which is dated 7th January, 1964. This return was based on the law as prevailed at that time in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Rameshwar Lal Sarup Chand v. U.S. Naurath and Another[1964] 15 S.T.C. 932; I.L.R. [1963] 2 Punj. 370. , wherein it had been held that an assessment under sub-sections (4) and (5) of section 11 of the principal Act had to be co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hin the period prescribed by the statute. Respondent No. 1 has stated in paragraph 3 of his return dated 20th April, 1965, as follows: "...........that definite act and steps were taken by the Assessing Authority declaring his intention to frame assessment on best judgment basis- (a) by issuing memorandum dated the 13th November, 1961, for appearance on the 30th November, 1961; and (b) the intention of framing assessment on best judgment was reiterated by the Assessing Authority; vide his order dated the 14th December, 1961." In the passage following the above quotations the law settled in the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case, Messrs. Jagat Ram Om Parkash v. The Excise and Taxation Officer, Amritsar[1965] 16 S.T.C. 107., has been almost repeated. The defence of the State in reply to the writ petition is twofold. It is firstly contended that the averments in para. 3 of their written statement reproduced above which relate to a question of fact should be assumed to be correct and following the same it should be held that definite and proper steps for proceeding to assess on best judgment basis were taken in this case in respect of each of the three quarters well ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esuscitate dead cases it cannot be presumed that any action which had become barred by time before the 10th of January, 1963, would become within time by such a prospective amendment of a particular Act which came into force after the expiry of the original period of limitation. This has also been authoritatively held in The Punjab Commerce Bank Ltd. v. Shri Brij Lal MahandirattaI.L.R. [1955] Punj. 297., by a Division Bench of this Court (Bhandari, C.J., and Bishan Narain, J.) in connection with the amendment of section 45-O of the Banking Companies Act. I, therefore, hold that the amendment effected by para. 5 of the said Ordinance and by section 5 of the Amending Act 2 of 1963 does not have retrospective effect and any assessments which had become barred by time before the 10th of January, 1963, could not be effected after that day by virtue of the amendment. This takes me back to the first question, i.e., whether respondent No. 1 had proceeded to assess the petitioner to the best of his judgment in respect of the first three quarters of the financial year 1959-60 within three years of the end of each respective quarter. No copy of the memorandum dated 13th November, 1961, for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : "In case of default I shall constrain to dispose the pending assessment for the years in dispute on ex parte and to best of judgment basis." In the order dated 22nd March, 1963 (annexure "C" to the writ petition) it is stated as follows: "The case was fixed before me in the first instance on the 15th of December, 1962, and the dealer had duly been informed, but nobody turned up. The case was then adjourned to 16th January, 1963, and the dealer was again informed: vide this office memorandum No. 4166/Co. III dated 12th January, 1963, at his home address and substituted service of the memorandum was also effected at the business premises by affixing the notice thereto, but despite all this nobody attended the court on the specified date. The case has again come before me today for assessment after substituted service........" It is, therefore, obvious that the respondent No. 1, the Assessing Authority was himself clear while passing the impugned order on 22nd March, 1963, that he was relying on the hearing before him held on 15th December, 1962, and the notices issued for 16th January, 1963, for making the best judgment assessment. The proceedings of those two dates have not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
