Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1968 (7) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... average sales per day worked out to Rs. 535. Based on this the dealer's turnover for the year works out to Rs. 535X313 days (excluding holidays) i.e., Rs. 1,67,455. Therefore a notice was issued on 12th September, 1963, in the following terms: "In continuation of the reference cited above Messrs Udipi Vasanta Vihar, Brodipet, are informed that the sales in their business premises were watched by the special staff with following results: Date of watch Sales found: Rs. 25-3-1960 540.11 26-3-1960 509.98 27-3-1960 613.88 29-3-1960 478.28 Total 2,142.25 The average sales per day at this rate works out to Rs. 535. Basing on this, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upon the decision in Lakshmana Rao Sons v. Special Commercial Tax Officer, Vijayawada[1962] 13 S.T.C. 860. It was held therein that section 28(2) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act does not authorise the Sales Tax Authorities to watch continually a hotel and its business from the moment it starts early in the morning till the whole day for several days. In that case the petitioners applied for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to be issued to the authorities to forbear from carrying on continuous supervision of the sales and supplies or other activities of the petitioners. From the mere fact that the authorities are not entitled to keep a continuous watch over the premises it does not follow that a notice issued u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s on a turnover which is arrived at after best judgment assessment, in that, the total turnover is computed by a process of inference from the total sales effected on four particular days and has no relation to the actual turnover suppressed. Section 14, sub-section (4), stood before its amendment in 1963 thus: "Where, for any reason, the whole or any part of the turnover of business of a dealer has escaped assessment to tax, or has been underassessed or assessed at too low a rate, or where the licence fee or registration fee has escaped levy or has been levied at too low a rate, the assessing authority may, at any time within a period of four years from the expiry of the year to which the tax or the licence fee or registration fee relate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the correct rate, the assessing authority may, after issuing a notice to the dealer, and after making such enquiry as he may consider necessary, by order, setting out the grounds therefor,- (a) determine to the best of his judgment the turnover that has escaped assessment and assess the turnover so determined; (b) assess the correct amount of tax payable on the turnover that has been under-assessed; (c) assess at the correct rate the turnover that has been assessed at a lower rate; (d) levy the licence fee after determining to the best of his judgment the turnover on which such fee is payable; (e) levy the registration fee that has escaped levy; or (f) levy the correct amount of licence fee or registration fee in a case where s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... und to have actually escaped assessment and could not determine an escaped turnover according to best judgment, whereas under the amended provision, the authority can determine to the best of its judgment the turnover which escaped assessment. In other words, the very quantum of the turnover is different according as section 14(4) without amendment is applied or section 14(4) after amendment is applied. Thus it affects substantive rights of the parties, viz., the tax payable by the assessee. It cannot, therefore, be said that this section does not affect vested rights but is merely a matter of procedure. In Lakshminarayana Chetty v. Additional Income-tax Officer[1956] 29 I.T.R. 419; (1956) An W.R. 243. , dealing with section 35 of the Inc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates