9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... And Pankaj Bhatia JJ. For the Petitioner : Suyash Agarwal For the Respondent : C.S.C. ORDER (Delivered by Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Heard Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Ankur Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, Special Counsel for Commercial Tax Department. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order for Assessment Year 2013-14 U.P. and Assessment Year 2013-14 Entry Tax passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Sector-8, Meerut (respondent no. 1) both dated 28.10.2016 and served upon the petitioner on 13.9.2017. The contention of the petitioner is that on the basis of the survey dated 27.6.2013, the Assessing Authority proposed to assess the petitioner for Assessment Year 2013-14 Entry Tax allegedly for the suppressed purchasers of sugar brought side from local area. Subsequently, for the Assessment Year 2013-14 U.P. and Assessment Year 2013-14 Entry Tax , the Assessing Officer passed an ex parte order on 31.7.2015 creating liability of ₹ 20,37,183/- and ₹ 2,10,000/- towards entry tax. The said assessment orders dated 31 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entioned when the first ex parte order is set aside. The said section clearly stipulates that the fresh order of assessment or reassessment has to be passed before the expiry of the assessment year in which such order of assessment or reassessment has been set aside. In view of the fact that the ex parte assessment order was passed on 30.6.2016, the order of fresh assessment had to be made by 31.3.2017 on which date the limitation to pass the order would expire. The submission by the petitioner further that the order served on the petitioner on 13.9.2017 was after a gap of about 11 months from the date of alleged assessment order. It was stated that the respondents have antedated the order only to get over the limitation and have subsequently put a date 28.10.2016 on the orders which was actually passed after the expiry of the limitation but was antedated only to overcome the limitation provided under Section 29 sub-section 6 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act. It was further stated that all the other assessment orders passed by the respondents, were computer generated, which is clear from the perusal of the earlier orders passed in the case of the petitioners themselves from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Ramakishtaiah and Co (S.C.), decided on 17.2.1994 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stated as under: We are of the opinion that the theory evolved by the High Court may not be really called for in the circumstances of the case. We are of the opinion that this appeal has to be dismissed on the ground urged by the assessee himself. As stated above, the order of the Deputy Commissioner is said to have been made on January 6, 1973, but it was served upon the assessee on November 21, 1973, i.e. precisely 10 1/2 months later. There is no explanation from the Deputy Commissioner why it was so delayed. If there had been a proper explanation, it would have been a different matter. But, in the absence of any explanation whatsoever, we must presume that the order was not made on the date it purports to have been made. It could have been made after the expiry of the pre3scribed four years' period. The civil appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. The petitioner has fuhrer relied upon the judgement of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of Santhosh Builders vs. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (CT), Nellore and othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst a person who does not reside within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the authority from which the notice, summon or order is issued, service on any manager or agent, who at the time of service, personally carries on such business or work for such person within such limits, shall be deemed good service. (d) Service on an adult member of dealer or concerned person's family- Where in any case the dealer or person concerned is absent from his residence at the time when the service of notice, summon or order is sought to be affected at his residence and there is no likelihood of his being found at the residence within a reasonable time and he has no agent empowered to accept service of the notice, summon or order on his behalf, service may be made on any adult member of the family, whether male or female, who is residing with him. Explanation:- A servant is not a member of the family within the meaning of this rule. (e) Person served to sign acknowledgement- Where the process server delivers or tenders a copy of the notice, order or summons to the dealer or person concerned personally, or to an agent or other person on his behalf, he shall require the sign ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er such service as it thinks fit. (i) Simultaneous issue of notice or order or summon for service by post in addition to personal service- (i) The authority shall, in addition to, and simultaneously with the issue of notice, order or summon for service in the manner provided under this rule, also direct the notice, order or summon to be served by registered post, acknowledgement due addressed to the dealer or person concerned, or his agent empowered to accept the service, at the place where the dealer or person concerned or his agent actually and voluntarily resided or carries on business or personally works for gain: Provided that nothing in this sub-clause shall require the authority to issue a notice, order or summon for service by registered post where in the circumstances of the case the authority considers it unnecessary. (ii) when an acknowledgement purporting to be signed by the dealer or person concerned or his agent is received by the authority or the postal article containing the notice, order or summon is received back by the authority with an endorsement purporting to have been made by a postal employee to the effect that the dealer or person concerned or h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the dealer or person concerned resides. (l) Duty of authority to which notice, order or summon is sent- The authority to which a notice, order or summons is sent under clause (k) shall, upon receipt thereof, proceed as if it has been issued by such authority and shall then return the notice, order or summons to the issuing authority, together with the record (if any) of its proceedings with regard thereto. (m) Service on dealer or person concerned in prison Where the dealer or person concerned is confined in a prison, the notice, order or summon shall be delivered or sent by post or otherwise to the officer in charge of the prison for service on the dealer or person concerned. (n) Service on civil public officer or on servant of railway or local authority - Where person concerned is a public officer (not belonging to the Indian Military, Naval or Air Forces), or is a servant of a railway or local authority, the authority may, if it appears to it that the notice, order or summon may be most conveniently so served, send it for service on the person concerned to the head of the officer in which he is employed together with a copy to be retained by the person concerne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
