TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1961 (9) TMI 63
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the respondent's right to assess the petitioner for the assessment year 1952-53 is barred by rule 34(1) of the Mysore Sales Tax Rules, 1948, which shall be hereinafter referred to as the "Rules". If our answer is in the affirmative, then the impugned order is liable to be quashed. The material facts are not disputed. They are as follows: The original assessment order dated 26th October, 1953, was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontention was reiterated in this Court that the impugned order relates to an "escaped assessment" and the same having been made after the period fixed in rule 34(1) of the Rules is unsustainable. The relevant portion of that rule reads thus: "If for any reason the whole or any part of the turnover of business of a dealer.............has escaped assessment to the tax in any year..........the Assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tary return. This contention does not appear to be factually correct. As noticed earlier, the return made by the assessee was not accepted by the Assessing Authority and the assessment was made on the basis of "best of judgment". Therefore, the ratio of the decision in State of Madras v. M.P. Ibrahim Kunhi and Others[1956] 7 S.T.C. 617; A.I.R. 1957 Mad. 627. is inapplicable to the facts of the pre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Profits Tax Act, 1947, which, for our present purpose, is pari materia with rule 34(1). Therein, their Lordships held that: "The words 'escaping assessment' apply equally to cases where a notice was received by the assessee but resulted in no assessment at all and to cases where due to any reason, no notice was issued to the assessee and, therefore, there was no assessment of his income." In the....