Delayed returns may be accepted at discretion, but rejected returns assessed by best judgment fall under escaped-assessment limits.

A delayed voluntary return may still be accepted at the taxing authority's discretion and assessed on that basis; the dealer has no enforceable right to insist on condonation, but delay alone does not create a time bar. If the return is not accepted and the assessing authority proceeds to a best judgment assessment, the matter is treated as escaped assessment and must comply with the limitation period prescribed for such cases. The wider meaning of "reject" includes non-acceptance of the return. The commentary therefore draws a distinction between discretionary acceptance of a late return and a best judgment assessment governed by escaped-assessment limits.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether a return voluntarily filed after the prescribed time could still be accepted and assessed on its basis; (ii) whether, where the return is not accepted and the assessing authority makes a best judgment assessment, the case falls under the escaped-assessment provision and is subject to the limitation prescribed therein.

Issue (i): whether a return voluntarily filed after the prescribed time could still be accepted and assessed on its basis.

Analysis: The absence of the phrase relating to a return for part of the year in the relevant rule did not prevent the department from accepting a delayed return and completing the assessment on that basis. A dealer had no right to insist on condonation of delay, but the taxing authority could, in its discretion, excuse the delay and proceed on the return. The mere fact that the return was filed more than three years after the close of the accounting year did not bar such an assessment.

Conclusion: A delayed voluntary return could be accepted and assessed on its basis, and no time-bar arose merely because of the delay.

Issue (ii): whether, where the return is not accepted and the assessing authority makes a best judgment assessment, the case falls under the escaped-assessment provision and is subject to the limitation prescribed therein.

Analysis: The word "reject" was taken in its wider sense to include non-acceptance of the return. If the assessing authority did not accept the return as the basis of assessment and instead proceeded to determine the turnover to the best of its judgment, the case was governed by the escaped-assessment rule. That rule was held to apply not only where some turnover escaped an existing assessment, but also to a first assessment where the turnover had not been brought to tax within the prescribed period. Once a return is filed or assessment proceedings are started in time, the final assessment need not be completed within three years; but where no return is made, or the return is rejected, recourse must be had to the escaped-assessment provision within its limitation period.

Conclusion: The best judgment assessment after rejection of the return was time-barred under the escaped-assessment rule.

Final Conclusion: The revision failed because the assessment, having proceeded by rejection of the return and best judgment, was governed by the limitation applicable to escaped assessment and could not be sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a return is not accepted and the assessing authority proceeds to a best judgment assessment, the matter is treated as one of escaped assessment and must be made within the limitation prescribed for such assessments; a delayed return may nevertheless be accepted at the discretion of the taxing authority.

---