9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (9) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shed return/correct return in form 'M' for the period from 1st April, 1969, to 9th December, 1969, and that it had made habitual default in the submission of return for that period from which it appeared to the committee that the firm had failed to furnish the return in respect of the above-mentioned period and that an assessment under rule 31 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets (General) Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), in respect of the above-mentioned period should be made. The appellant-firm was directed to produce or cause to be produced its accounts and documents at the office of the Market Committee at Ambala Cantt. A partner of the appellant-firm appeared and pleaded guilty with regard to the omission of the transactions which had been found by the secretary on 9th December, 1969, and asked for forgiveness. The administrator passed an order dated 19th January, 1970, making an assessment on the appellant at the rate of Rs. 22.04 per working day with effect from 1st April, 1969, to 9th December, 1969, in exercise of his power under rule 31(8) of the Rules. The secretary of the market committee was directed to work out the working days and the total a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e guess-work and there was no proper basis for making the best judgment assessment. As the error was apparent on the face of the order, it was not necessary for the assessees to go in appeal under the Sales Tax Act before invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court under article 226. A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court in Balakrishna and Sons v. Sales Tax Officer and Another[1961] 12 S.T.C. 272. , held that: "In making a best judgment assessment, the assessing authority discharges quasi-judicial functions and the order he passes must not be capricious, arbitrary or punitive. The order must also disclose the basis for the best judgment assessment, so that the higher authorities may know the grounds on which the assessment has been based." A learned single judge of the Kerala High Court (Vaidialingam, J., now a judge of the Supreme Court) in Namadeva Shenoy v. Sales Tax Officer, Special Circle, Cannanore[1963] 14 S.T.C. 159., observed as under: "It is needless to state that when the officer proceeds to make a best judgment assessment, there is a duty on his part to make available to the petitioner every point or aspect that he proposes to take into account in making the bes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show cause, the authority can decide according to his whim and fancy. The judicial process does not end by making known to a person the proposal against him and giving him a chance to explain. It extends further to a judicial consideration of his representations and the materials and a fair determination of the question involved. If the quasi-judicial authority disregards the materials available or if it refuses to apply its mind to the question and if it reaches a conclusion which bears no relation to the facts before it, to allow those decisions to stand would be violative of the principles of natural justice. Arbitrary decisions can also, therefore, result in violation of the principles of natural justice which is a fundamental concept of Indian jurisprudence. In certain cases, where an authority refuses to apply its mind to the question and makes a decision as it likes, it may amount to even a mala fide decision. The existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the issue of a writ of certiorari when there has been violation of the principles of natural justice and infringement of fundamental rights. The remedy available by way of appeal to the appellate aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not have kept parallel accounts, as duplication of false accounts would facilitate discovery of fraud and it would have been thought advisable to maintain only one set of false accounts in the head office. Be that as it may, the maintenance of secret accounts in the branch office cannot be assumed in the circumstances of the case. That apart, the maintenance of secret accounts in the branch office might lead to an inference that the accounts disclosed did not comprehend all the transactions of the branch office. But that does not establish or even probabilise the finding that 135 per cent. or 200 per cent. or 500 per cent. of the disclosed turnover was suppressed. That could have been ascertained from other materials. The branch office had dealings with other customers. Their names were disclosed in the accounts. The accounts of those customers or their statements could have afforded a basis for the best judgment assessment. There must also have been other surrounding circumstances, such as those mentioned in the Privy Council's decision' cited supra. But in this case there was no material before the assessing authority relevant to the assessment and the impugned assessments were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
