https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45642 A taxing scheme on oil mills was construed as placing the duty to furnish returns and pay cess on the mill owner, so a lease to another operator did not shift liability or defeat assessment. The Act was also read as containing no one-month limitation on the Collector's power to assess where returns were omitted or inaccurate, allowing recovery of statutory liability for earlier periods. Rule 33 was upheld because the assessment power was not uncontrolled: revision by the District Judge and correction mechanisms within the scheme supplied adequate safeguards and guidance. On that basis, the demand and assessment were sustained. en-us Mon, 19 Dec 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:20:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45642 A taxing scheme on oil mills was construed as placing the duty to furnish returns and pay cess on the mill owner, so a lease to another operator did not shift liability or defeat assessment. The Act was also read as containing no one-month limitation on the Collector's power to assess where returns were omitted or inaccurate, allowing recovery of statutory liability for earlier periods. Rule 33 was upheld because the assessment power was not uncontrolled: revision by the District Judge and correction mechanisms within the scheme supplied adequate safeguards and guidance. On that basis, the demand and assessment were sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Dec 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45642