Unregistered dealer assessment faces no limitation under the special best-judgment provision, not the escaped-turnover rule.

A dealer liable to tax who failed to obtain registration could be assessed under the unregistered-dealer provision, which authorises best-judgment assessment by the Collector. The turnover-escaping-assessment provision did not govern such a case because the issue was non-registration, not escaped turnover. Applying the corresponding later provision, the court treated no limitation period as applicable to action against an unregistered dealer, so the limitation objection could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment of an unregistered dealer under section 14(6) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953 for the period 1 April 1954 to 31 December 1959 was barred by limitation.

Analysis: Section 14(6) empowered the Collector to assess to the best of his judgment a dealer who was liable to pay tax but had failed to apply for registration. Section 15 dealt with turnover escaping assessment and was not the governing provision for such a case. The Court followed the principle that the corresponding provision in the later Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, namely section 33(6), applies to an unregistered dealer who has never complied with the law and that no period of limitation is prescribed for action under that provision. On that basis, the Tribunal's view that the assessment was time-barred could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The assessment was not barred by limitation and the question was answered in the negative, in favour of the department.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a dealer liable to tax has failed to get registered, assessment under the provision dealing with unregistered dealers is not subject to any limitation period, and the turnover-escaping-assessment provision does not apply.

---