Best judgment assessment requires substantive compliance with notice; jurisdictional objections alone did not save the dealer, and limitation defeated the assessment.
A dealer must substantively comply with a notice under section 11(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 by supporting the return with evidence; merely raising jurisdictional or limitation objections is not compliance. On the facts, the dealer's reply did not seek to prove the return or ask to lead evidence, so section 11(4) governing best judgment assessment was attracted. However, because the assessment was made after the statutory period had expired, it could not be sustained and was quashed.
Issues: Whether the dealer failed to comply with the notice issued under section 11(2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, so as to attract best judgment assessment under section 11(4), and whether the assessment made after the expiry of the statutory period was liable to be quashed.
Analysis: The notice under section 11(2) required the dealer to attend and support its return by evidence. The dealer's reply did not seek to substantiate the return or ask for an opportunity to lead evidence; it confined itself to objections that the proceedings were invalid, time-barred, and without jurisdiction. On the facts, there was no compliance with the notice in the sense contemplated by section 11(3). The case therefore fell within section 11(4), which authorises best judgment assessment where the dealer fails to comply with the notice. Since the assessment was made after the statutory period had expired, it could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The dealer was held to have failed to comply with the notice, section 11(4) applied, and the assessment was liable to be quashed.
Final Conclusion: Relief was granted to the petitioner by setting aside the assessment on the ground that the statutory conditions for maintaining the best judgment assessment were not satisfied within time.
Ratio Decidendi: A dealer who does not substantively respond to a notice under section 11(2) by producing evidence in support of the return, and instead raises only jurisdictional objections, fails to comply with the notice so as to attract best judgment assessment under section 11(4), subject to the prescribed limitation period.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
