9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the U.P. Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act in pursuance to the remand order dated July 31, 1984 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, (Judicial), Sales Tax, Kanpur, subject to any order which may have been passed earlier, were stayed up to August 6, 1986. The interim order was directed to operate till September 2, 1986 and thereafter on February 26, 1986, till further orders. The writ petitions were dismissed for want of prosecution on July 29, 1999 and were restored on August 3, 1999. Again, on August 26, 2003, the writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution as the counsel did not have any instructions. The matter was released by learned judges hearing the matter on April 2, 2004. In the aforesaid background, the w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed on August 18, 1984. It was admitted by the Department that a duplicate register was prepared in which the order dated August 18, 1985, is alleged to have been passed, but the order was never served on the petitioner. The court had asked the assessing officer to file his affidavit explaining the circumstances in which the duplicate file was prepared and whether the order was passed within limitation on June 18, 1985. In the counter-affidavit of Sri S.D. Dwivedi, the Sales Tax Officer, Chandpur, District Bijnor, who was then posted at Kanpur, the following explanation has been given: (b) That the appellate authority is required to deliver every order passed under section 9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act to the parties concerned an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inal assessment filed was not readily available in the office but inasmuch as the entire relevant information with regard to the petitioner was available in the confidential file by way of original assessment order and the deponent has also in possession the copy of the appellate orders, these notices as well as the appellate orders were kept in separate file thereinafter called as duplicate file. (g) That separate notices for the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82 (U.P. and Central) were issued to the petitioner and when the process server served the notice, the same had been refused to acknowledge. The notices and the report of process server were kept on duplicate file. Inasmuch as the original file as also duplicate file m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fidavit filed by Sri S.R. Dohre. 6. That inasmuch as the recovery proceedings in respect of these assessment years, namely 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82 under the U.P. and Central, in Writ Petition Nos. 656, 657 and 658 of 1983, the deponent did not serve the assessment orders and the demand notices. 7. That thereafter on receiving the transfer order, the deponent handed over the charge of the Sales Tax Officer, Sector 16, Kanpur on June 21, 1986. We have considered the submissions of Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal. He submits that when the assessing authority found that the remand order has not been complied with, he prepared a duplicate file and purportedly prepared an order, making it within limitation. He further submits that the circum ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
