Proper service of sales tax notice must match the assessed dealer; unclear firm-individual proceedings required fresh scrutiny.

Notice under section 11(2) of the Bengal Finance Sales Tax Act, 1941, read with rule 32 of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951, had to be issued to the dealer against whom proceedings were intended. Here, the statutory notices were addressed to the firm name, while the assessments were made against the individual dealer, and the assessment orders themselves did not clearly resolve whether the proceedings were against the firm or the individual. The authorities also failed to properly examine the contention that the disputed contracts at Simla, Dehradun and Delhi belonged to the partnership concern. On the existing record, the assessments could not be properly sustained and required fresh consideration by the assessing authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessments were valid when the notice under section 11(2) was issued to the firm name and not to the individual dealer against whom the assessments were made, and whether the authorities had properly examined the appellant's plea that the disputed contracts belonged to the partnership concern.

Analysis: The notice under section 11(2) of the Bengal Finance Sales Tax Act, 1941, read with rule 32 of the Delhi Sales Tax Rules, 1951, had to be issued to the dealer against whom proceedings were intended. The record showed that the statutory notices were addressed to M/s. Aggarwal & Co. and not to Shri J.P. Aggarwal individually. The assessment orders also reflected uncertainty as to whether the proceedings were against the firm or the individual. The authorities below did not adequately examine the appellant's contention that the contracts at Simla, Dehradun and Delhi were taken by the partnership concern and not by him in his personal capacity.

Conclusion: The assessments were not properly sustained on the existing record and the matter required fresh consideration by the assessing authority.

---