9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (7) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng a detailed enquiry into the exemptions claimed by it. On remand, the Sales Tax Officer passed a fresh assessment order dated 28th February, 1971, disallowing certain exemptions claimed by the petitioner. The petitioner once again appealed. That appeal is pending. On 20th March, 1971, the Sales Tax Officer issued to the petitioner a notice under section 21 of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1966-67 saying that he had reason to believe that the turnover of the petitioner had escaped assessment and requiring the petitioner to file a fresh return. The petitioner has challenged that notice in this petition under article 226 of the Constitution. The notice under section 21 of the Act has been challenged on two grounds: (1) that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be invalid if it does not contain any reasons for the issuance of such a notice. We do not know the precise language in which section 12(8) of the Orissa Act is couched. May be that that provision requires the reasons and the material to be disclosed in the notice itself but if that provision is in pari materia with section 21 of our Act, we are unable to agree with the Orissa High Court. No form has been prescribed for a notice under section 21 either under the Act or under the Rules. It is not necessary that such a notice should specify the items of turnover which have escaped assessment or the source of such item. In other words, it is not necessary that the material upon which the notice is based should be disclosed in the noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessment year 1966-67 foodgrains worth Rs. 15,790.67 to Sarvashri Badri Das Laxmi Narain of Hathras. At the time of assessment proceedings, the petitioner had disclosed sales to the above dealer of Rs. 15,071.35 only. It has further been stated that on going through the file, the Sales Tax Officer discovered that information had also been received from the Sales Tax Officer, Muzaffarnagar, on 22nd February, 1971, saying that the petitioner had sold during 1966-67 foodgrains worth Rs. 1,12,082.59 to Sarvashri Nand Lal Paras Ram of Muzaffarnagar and at the time of assessment the petitioner had shown sales to the above Muzaffarnagar dealer of Rs. 98,188.86 only. We are satisfied that the material disclosed in the counter-affidavit was a re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
