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 notice initiating and converting the assessment proceeding satisfied the mandatory requirement of Rule 19(4) of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules, 1983 by conveying the gist of accusations, and whether non-compliance vitiated the order passed under Section 20(1)(b) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981.
Analysis: The notice issued at the stage of conversion of proceedings was found to be cryptic and did not clearly disclose the materials gathered by the Revenue or the accusations that formed the basis of the proposed action. The earlier notices and adjournment orders also did not communicate the allegations with sufficient clarity, and there was nothing to show that the later order containing the material particulars was made known to the petitioner or supplied with the notice. In such circumstances, the petitioner could not be said to have had effective knowledge of the case it had to meet, and the requirement of Rule 19(4), which is mandatory, was not satisfied. The Tribunal's contrary view was rejected.
Conclusion: The order passed under Section 20(1)(b) was unsustainable for want of a proper notice containing the gist of accusations, and the appellate and revisional orders based on it also could not stand.