Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the impugned assessment order was barred by limitation and liable to be set aside on the ground that the order purportedly made on 25 August 1993 was not shown to have been made within four years from the earlier appellate order dated 27 December 1989.
Analysis: The demand notice was served only on 1 November 1994 and the copy of the assessment order was obtained on 7 November 1994, while the respondents failed to produce the issue register to establish that the notice was actually ready for despatch on the earlier date mentioned in the record. In the absence of a satisfactory explanation, a presumption arose that the assessment order was not made on the date it purported to bear or was made after expiry of the prescribed limitation period. Following the principle that an unexplained delay and incongruity in service may justify a presumption against the stated date of the order, the Tribunal held that the assessment could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The limitation objection succeeded and the impugned assessment order and consequential demand notice were set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an order is challenged on limitation and the record does not satisfactorily prove that it was made on the date it purports to bear, the court may presume that it was made after the expiry of the limitation period and invalidate it.