Late production of declaration forms cannot reopen a completed assessment absent sufficient cause or necessity for additional evidence.

Completed assessments could not be reopened merely because C Forms were produced later in appeal, as the rules permitted filing declaration forms before assessment and did not authorise re-opening a final assessment on a general plea of delay. The appellate authority could receive additional evidence only where sufficient cause for the late production was shown or the record was inadequate for decision, and neither procedural necessity nor sufficient explanation was established. The tribunal's order condoning the delay and directing fresh assessment was therefore set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority could condone the delay and receive C Forms produced after the assessment had been made, so as to require a fresh assessment.

Analysis: The notice issued to the dealer had already required production of the evidence within the stipulated time and indicated the consequence of default. The assessing authority had completed the assessment before the C Forms were received. Rule 6(1) permitted filing of declaration forms before assessment, but Rule 6(5) contemplated final assessment on the existing record after scrutiny and enquiry, and did not authorise reopening of a completed assessment merely because forms were later produced. The appellate authority could not admit the forms unless the delay was shown to be sufficiently explained or the record was inadequate for decision; no such procedural necessity or sufficient cause was established.

Conclusion: The appellate tribunal was not justified in condoning the delay or directing fresh assessment. The revision succeeded and the order of the appellate tribunal was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute and rules do not confer power to reopen a completed assessment, declaration forms produced after final assessment cannot be received in appeal merely on a general plea of delay unless sufficient cause or necessity for additional evidence is established.

---