TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1956 (9) TMI 47
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e respondent in this case is the same as the respondent in Crl. R.C. No. 711 of 1955.* This case relates to the assessment for three months in the year 1952-53. The respondent has not submitted any return declaring his turnover because according to him he had stopped the business as (1) [1956] 7 S.T.C. 346; A.I.R. 1956 Mad. 480. Since reported as The Public Prosecutor v. K.P. Chandrasekharan [19....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m very soon. This statement was made on 16th March, 1954. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer by notice dated 20th March, 1954, Exhibit P-2, called upon him to pay the tax by assessing the assessee to the best of his judgment. For the quarter he assessed him on the turnover of Rs. 50,000 on the basis of the turnover of Rs. 2,00,000 determined for the previous year. In the Crl. R.C. No. 711 of 1955, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herefore stand under the circumstances. This lower court acquitted the respondent on the ground that there was no basis for the assessment on Rs. 50,000 as turnover. It is not correct in holding that there is no basis. But in that case I have pointed out that the previous assessment was not a valid one and the assessment on the basis of the previous invalidated assessment cannot therefore be held ....