9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (5) TMI 418X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inted out that the petitioner had made inter-State sales of peas (matar) on the turnover of which no tax has been levied in the original assessment and the turnover thereof has escaped assessment. It was after the perusal of the audit report that the assessing officer issued the impugned notices dated 21-11-1981 and 19-11-1981 (Annexures-7 and 8 to the writ petition). The petitioner's case is that in the original assessment the accounts book of the petitioner had been accepted and that no tax was levied on the petitioner's turnover of cereals and pulses as the turnover thereof was exempted by the State of Uttar Pradesh by a notification issued under Section 8 (5) of the Central Sales Tax Act. According to the petitioner it had purch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; (vii) ragi (Elcusine coradana Caertn.) ; (viii) kodon (panpalum sorobiculatum L.) ; (ix) kutki (panicum miliare L.); (x) Barley (Hordeum Vulgare L.). 6. Pulses, on the other hand have been mentioned in item No. (vi-a) as under : (vi-a) pulses, that is to say, - (i) gram or gulab gram (Cicerarietinum L.) ; (ii) tur or arhar (Cajanus cajan) ; (iii) rooong or green gram (phaseolus aureous) ; (iv) masur of lentil (Lons esculenta moench, Lons culinaris Modic) ; (v) urged or black gram (phaseolus jaog) ; (vi) moth (pheseolus aconitifolius Jaog) ; (vii) lakh or khesari (Lathyrus sativus L.). 7. The two definitions are exclusive in nature meaning thereby that only those articles are cereals or pulses that have been mentioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t thereof, has escaped assessment and when the Audit party pointed out the facts to him he had a good cause or reason to believe that the turnover of peas has escaped assesment. 9. Reliance placed on M/s. Palco Lining Co. v. State of U. P., 1983 U. P. T. C. 1116 is of no help to the petitioner because that was a case in which in the original assessment the matter was duly considered and adjudicated upon. It was held that a reassessment cannot be made subsequently on change of opinion. As already stated, this is not a case of change of opinion and is a matter of detention of a lapse on the part of the Assessing Officer. Learned Counsel for the respondent placed reliance on M/s. A. L. A. Firm v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 1991 U ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
