Improper service of assessment orders deemed invalid under rule; Petitioner entitled to file appeals

The court held that service of assessment orders by affixture at the business address, instead of the residential address, was not valid under rule 52(1)(d) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules. As there was no proper service, the petitioner's appeals were not time-barred, and he was entitled to file appeals upon obtaining certified copies within the prescribed period. Consequently, the court allowed both petitions, setting aside the previous orders and directing the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to consider the appeals on merit.

---

---

Issues:
Proper service of assessment orders as per rule 52 of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules and whether the appeal is barred by limitation.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Proper service of assessment orders
The petitioner, a blue metal business proprietor, closed his business due to loss and transferred it to a third party in 1992-93. Despite informing the authorities, assessment orders were sent to the closed factory address, leading to non-receipt by the petitioner. The assessing officer claimed service by affixture, but the petitioner argued for service at his residential address. The court found no personal service and noted the pre-assessment notice was served at the residential address. The court held that service by affixture at the business address, disowned by the petitioner, was not valid as per rule 52(1)(d) of the Rules.

Issue 2: Appeal barred by limitation
The petitioner, upon learning about revenue recovery proceedings, obtained certified copies of assessment orders and filed appeals within the time limit. The court observed that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and Tribunal erred in considering the appeals time-barred based on the affixture of orders. The court ruled that since there was no valid service, the petitioner was entitled to file appeals upon obtaining certified copies within the prescribed period.

In conclusion, the court allowed both petitions, setting aside the Tribunal and Appellate Assistant Commissioner's orders. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner was directed to consider the appeals on merit.

---