9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (10) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Sales Tax and pertains to the assessment year 1978-79. 2. The assessee had been granted a recognition certificate under sub-section (2) of Section 4-B of the Sales Tax Act. The Sales Tax Officer was of the view that .the certificate required amendment. The assessee's representative appeared before the Sales Tax Officer on 28-8-1979 on which date, with the consent of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t been specified. It further found that a copy of the order of amendment had not been sent to the assessee. In these circumstances it held that the original recognition certificate issued to the assessee did not stand amended and, therefore, proceedings under Section 4-B against the assessee were unjustified. 5. In this revision by the Commissioner of Sales Tax it is contended that the opportunit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he could not complain about the alleged illegality in the amendment of the certificate in assessment proceedings. 7. In reply to this argument of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, the learned counsel for the assessee contends that the requirement in sub-rule (10) that the date from which the order of amendment is to take effect in the recognition certificate is mandatory and failure to comply with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cify the date from which it will take effect. The learned counsel for the assessee is correct in urging that in view of the language of sub-rule (10) of Rule 25-A the order of amendment has to be communicated to the assessee in order to be binding on the assessee. Communication of the order on the facts of this case may be only technical requirement as the assessee's representative was present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
