Cross-examination in best judgment sales tax assessments is part of the statutory right to prove a return's correctness.

A statutory opportunity to prove the correctness or completeness of a return under Kerala sales tax law includes the right to meet third-party account material relied on by the department. Where a best judgment assessment is proposed on the basis of entries in other dealers' accounts, the assessee must be allowed to test that material by cross-examination, since the right to "prove" the return extends to legally permissible evidence needed to rebut adverse material. Refusal of requested cross-examination breaches natural justice and invalidates the assessment.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a best judgment sales tax assessment under section 17(3) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963, the assessee's reasonable opportunity to prove the correctness or completeness of the return includes the right to cross-examine third-party dealers whose accounts are relied upon to hold the return incorrect or incomplete.

Analysis: Section 17(3) contemplates two stages: the assessing authority must first be satisfied that the return is incorrect or incomplete and may then make a best judgment assessment. The proviso requires that before action under the sub-section the dealer be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and where a return has been submitted, an opportunity to prove its correctness or completeness. The Court held that this statutory opportunity is not confined to a bare oral hearing; where the department relies on entries in the accounts of third parties to reject the assessee's return, the assessee can effectively rebut that material only by testing those accounts through cross-examination. The expression 'to prove' includes proving by legally permissible evidence, and cross-examination is an accepted means of exposing falsity or unreliability in the material used against the assessee.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to cross-examine the third-party dealers, and refusal of that opportunity vitiated the assessments.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed because the impugned assessments were made without affording the assessee the statutory opportunity required to rebut the material used against him.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing statute confers a reasonable opportunity to prove the correctness or completeness of a return, and the assessment rests on third-party accounts, denial of requested cross-examination of those third parties amounts to breach of natural justice and invalidates the assessment.

---