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 Section 28A of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 dispensed with the requirement that the Assessing Authority must proceed to best judgment assessment within five years under Section 28(4) for cases relating to periods prior to 1 April 1979.
Analysis: Section 28(4) prescribed a five-year period for proceeding to best judgment assessment after failure to comply with notice. Section 28A was inserted with a non-obstante clause to override contrary provisions and to dispense with the second notice, disclosure of the basis of best judgment assessment, and other procedural steps. The language of Section 28A did not remove the five-year requirement in Section 28(4); rather, it permitted the Assessing Authority to proceed without the further procedural safeguards earlier required. The statutory scheme and the legislative object showed that the amendment cured the requirement of a second notice, but did not eliminate the time limit for initiating best judgment proceedings.
Conclusion: The Assessing Authority remained bound to issue notice and proceed within the five-year period prescribed under Section 28(4); the answer was in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: A provision dispensing with additional procedural steps for best judgment assessment does not, without clear words, abrogate the statutory limitation period for initiating such assessment proceedings.