9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (6) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iefly, the facts giving rise to this reference are as follows. The assessee is a registered dealer under the Act. From 1st April, 1969, to 31st March, 1970, it submitted quarterly returns for the four quarters declaring gross sales at Rs. 1,34,586.87 and claimed deductions of the following amounts: (i) Sales of tax-free goods Rs. 16,887.32 (ii) Sales made to registered dealers Rs. 63,405.12 (iii) Deduction under section 5(2)(b) Rs. 872.72 On 27th May, 1970, the Assessing Authority issued notice of assessment to the assessee for 10th June, 1970, on which date Shri Ram Singh, father of Shri Inderjit Singh, appeared and sought an adjournment to 18th June, 1970. On the adjourned date Shri Ram Singh again appeared and the case was partia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of remunerations at the rate of 4 annas per Rs. 100. The assessee was asked to prove the factum of sale to the abovesaid parties. The assessee was asked to appear on 27th October, 1970, which was declared a holiday. A fresh notice for appearance on 27th November, 1970, was issued to the assessee which was served upon it in the evening on 26th November, 1970. On 27th November, 1970, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Assessing Authority. Consequently, it framed a best judgment assessment and determined the turnover of the assessee at Rs. 1,51,040.29. The claim of deductions with regard to sale of tax-free goods was repelled on the ground that the assessee had not produced the account books to prove the claims. Regarding s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioners, that the notice dated 19th October, 1970, by which the assessee was directed to explain the entries in the diary seized from Shri Ram Singh and prove the purchases by M/s. Om Parkash and Sons and M/s. Brij Bhushan Jai Gopal as the former firm had denied the purchases from the assessee during the assessment year 1969-70 and the latter firm had since closed the business and no return was filed by it relating to the said assessment year was served late in the evening on 26th November, 1970, and the case was fixed for 27th November, 1970, on which date ex Parte proceedings were taken. According to him, in this situation it cannot be said that an adequate opportunity was given to the assessee to represent its case before the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otice, the assessee had to prove the genuineness of the transactions in favour of M/s. Om Parkash and Sons and M/s. Brij Bhushan Jai Gopal and had further to explain the entries in the diary seized from Shri Ram Singh, father of the proprietor of the assessee-firm. The assessee did require some time to prove all the facts. After taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the assessee was not given reasonable opportunity of being heard. Therefore, we answer question No. (1) in the negative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. The Assessing Authority may, however, proceed to make assessment in accordance with law. In view of the reply to question No. (1), ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
