Limitation under trade tax law turned on missing service records, and anti-dating was accepted against the Revenue.

The limitation objection under section 21(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act was central, and the absence of the original process-server record proved decisive. The Revenue failed to produce the record showing when the assessment order was actually handed over for service, despite directions to do so, and the Court treated that failure as strengthening the dealer's claim that the order had been anti-dated to defeat the statutory time limit. The assessment order was therefore treated as beyond limitation, and the challenge based on delayed service and anti-dating succeeded in favour of the revisionist.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment order was barred by limitation under section 21(5) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, and whether, in the absence of the original process-server record, the allegation of anti-dating and delayed service had to be accepted.

Analysis: The question of limitation had been specifically raised before the authorities below and remained the central controversy in the revision. The Court noted that the Revenue was unable to produce the original record showing when the order was actually handed over to the process server, despite directions to do so. In such circumstances, the Court held that the dealer could not be made to suffer for the Revenue's failure to preserve the record. The absence of the original record strengthened the revisionist's plea that the order had been anti-dated to overcome the statutory time limit.

Conclusion: The assessment order was treated as beyond limitation, the challenge based on anti-dating was accepted, and the issue was answered in favour of the revisionist and against the Revenue.

---