9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (1) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner-firm in form S.T. XIX by respondent No. 4 for the assessment years 1967-68, 196869 and 1969-70 for starting reassessment proceedings under section 11-A of the Act. In the notices it was stated as under: "Sales to the following unregistered dealers have been made and deductions as sales made to R.Ds. were claimed and allowed: 1.. M/s. B.S. Arora, Amritsar. 2. M/s. Bhajan Lal Bros., Amritsar. 3. M/s. Jamna Dass Boa Dass, Amritsar. 4. M/s. Dharam Paul Sharma, Amritsar. 5. M/s. Munshi Lal Co., Amritsar. 6. M/s. Prem Singh Vasdev, Amritsar." On 2nd December, 1971, the Assessing Authority passed an order under section 11-A of the Act reassessing the petitioner-firm and creating an additional liability for the year 1967-68 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il Writ Petition No. 2463 of 1973, which came up for hearing before my learned brother R.N. Mittal, J., on 13th December, 1974. The learned Judge ordered that since the order passed by me in the earlier writ petition had not been complied with and the principles of natural justice were violated, the order passed deserved to be cancelled. He ordered accordingly and directed the Assessing Authority to give the petitioner-firm full opportunity of producing evidence before it. Against that order passed by R.N. Mittal, J., the State filed L.P.A. No. 80 of 1975, which is still pending in this court. During the pendency of the Writ Petition No. 2463 of 1973, the Assessing Authority issued fresh notices for initiating reassessment proceedings for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entioned point is further amplified by stating that the department itself tried to serve these dealers and when they were not found on these addresses, dasti summonses were given to the petitioner-firm so as to enable it to produce them before the Assessing Authority and since it failed to do so the orders of reassessment were passed against it. The allegation made on behalf of the petitioner-firm that the earlier assessment had been framed by the Assessing Authority after examination of the accounts and verification of the returns and documents has not been denied in the written statement. The Assessing Authority initiated reassessment proceedings on the basis of the affidavits filed by the aforementioned six firms in which it had been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the aforementioned six firms swore affidavits before the department, they must have indicated their respective addresses and it would have been quite easy for it to get their service effected on the given addresses. The department cannot press into service its own negligence to serve a witness for calling upon the assessee to do so on its behalf. For this reason also we hold that the order of reassessment passed by the Assessing Authority stands vitiated. For the reasons mentioned above, we set aside the order of reassessment passed by the Assessing Authority and the orders passed by the first and the second appellate authorities and remand the case to the Assessing Authority so that the same may proceed in accordance with law. The peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
