Jurisdictional service of notice under sales tax law must follow the prescribed hierarchy before affixation is used.

Proceedings for escaped assessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act required valid service of notice as a jurisdictional condition. Rule 77 imposed a hierarchy of service modes, and affixation could be used only if the earlier modes were not practicable. Because the authority directed personal service, registered post, and affixation at the same time without objectively recording why the prior modes could not be used, service was held not to conform to law. The notice was therefore invalid, jurisdiction did not vest in the assessing authority, and the assessment proceedings and consequential order were liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether proceedings for escaped assessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act were without jurisdiction for want of valid service of notice in accordance with rule 77.

Analysis: Notice under section 21 was a jurisdictional prerequisite. Rule 77 prescribed a hierarchy of modes of service, and service by affixation could be resorted to only when service by the earlier modes was not practicable. The record showed that the business had already closed, yet notice was simultaneously issued for personal service, registered post, and affixation, without an objective determination recorded on the order sheet that the other modes were impracticable. The decision to combine ordinary service and affixation in advance disclosed no proper application of mind. Since service by affixation is an exceptional mode and could not be pre-emptively directed without first exhausting or finding unavailable the other prescribed modes, the notice was not served in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The notice initiating proceedings under section 21 was invalid, the assessing authority acquired no jurisdiction, and the resultant assessment proceedings were liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded because the escaped-assessment proceedings were vitiated at the threshold for want of lawful notice, and the consequential assessment order also fell.

Ratio Decidendi: Where statutory notice is a jurisdictional condition, service must strictly conform to the prescribed hierarchy of modes, and affixation cannot be directed unless the authority objectively records that the earlier modes are not practicable.

---