9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (8) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 1965-66 on the basis of best judgment as he had failed to produce proper accounts. Later on, however, on 22nd January, 1970, he filed another affidavit before the Sales Tax Officer declaring that the petitioner was also a partner with him and to support this contention he produced a partnership deed. The Sales Tax Officer thereupon recorded a finding for the assessment year 1966-67 that the petitioner was also a partner along with Sheo Prasad Rai. No notice of any kind was given to the petitioner before passing the aforesaid order. As no tax for any of the assessment years was paid, the Sales Tax Officer started recovery proceedings. A recovery certificate was issued not only against Sheo Prasad Rai, but also against the petitioner in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer to have issued notice to the petitioner before recording any finding In this regard. The assessment order for the year 1966-67 is accordingly void having been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. We may point out that an assessment order should contain not only the assessment of turnover and tax but should also indicate the person liable to pay the same. The department will be well-advised to amend the form of return so as to include therein a column showing the status of the assessee, namely, as to whether the assessee is an individual, a firm, a Hindu undivided family, a company or an association of persons, etc. When the assessee is a firm, the application for registration must be signed by all the partners. When ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him. It would be enough to declare that the recovery proceedings against the petitioner in respect of the assessment years 1962-63 to 1965-66 are unauthorised and without jurisdiction. So far as the assessment year 1966-67 is concerned, the assessment order does contain a finding that the petitioner was a partner, but the finding having been recorded without notice to the petitioner is not sustainable in law. We accordingly allow this petition, quash the assessment order for the year 1966-67 and the recovery proceedings against the petitioner in respect of the assessment years 1962-63 to 1966-67 both inclusive. The petitioner is entitled to the costs. A copy of this judgment may be sent to the State Government for consideration of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
