9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (6) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on December 10, 1986 and on the said date the representative for the applicants was very much present before the assessing officer with books of account and the representative prayed for an adjournment on the ground that certain declaration forms were not readily available with them and that the Commercial Tax Officer directed them to file the application for adjournment in the receiving section, and the representative acted accordingly. But surprisingly later it was detected that the assessment order was passed ex parte on the very same date, i.e., December 10, 1986. The applicants' further case is that they were served with a demand notice in form VII according to the old rule without any copy of the assessment order. Thereafter an appl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had to apply for certified copy, so that on receipt of such copy, appeal could be filed. He, therefore, contends that after receipt of the service copy the applicants came to know about the contents of the assessment order and within the period of limitation, the appeal was filed. 3.. Mr. S.K. Saha Roy, learned State Representative, submits that official record would show that the date for hearing of the assessment order was October 4, 1986, and not December 10, 1986, as alleged by the applicants, and on the date so fixed nobody turned up on behalf of the applicants. He further points out that accordingly the Commercial Tax Officer completed assessment and passed his order on December 10, 1986. However, Mr. Saha Roy is not readil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 13 days after the receipt of the notice. Again, the service copy was made available on August 23, 1991 and the appeal was filed on October 3, 1991, i.e., 41 days after the receipt of the service copy. Mr. Goswami points out that within 54 days of receipt of the demand notice, after deducting the period required for obtaining the service copy, the appeal was filed and it was thus within the period of limitation. This aspect has also not been disputed. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the appellate authority was not correct in holding that the appeal was barred by limitation. On that count alone the appellate order as well as the subsequent revisional order cannot be sustained. 5.. In the above circumstances, we set aside the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
