TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1974 (4) TMI 93
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Officer, on 24th March, 1962, passed an ex parte assessment order determining the escaped turnover at Rs. 10,00,000 and assessing the assessee to a tax of Rs. 31,250. The assessee felt aggrieved and went up in appeal. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) held that the assessment order was passed within the prescribed period of time. He took note of the plea raised on behalf of the assessee that he did not do any business during the year 195657 and found that the Sales Tax Officer had not adequately dealt with this question. The assessee pleaded that the information with regard to the draft in the sum of Rs. 73,411-9-6 in the possession of the Sales Tax Officer was misconceived. He held that the assessee should have been confron....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te action." Thereafter, nothing seems to have happened till 27th March, 1961, when another Sales Tax Officer took up the file. He passed the following order on the order-sheet: "Since the dealer has not filed returns the notice should have been issued under section 21. Issue notice and call the dealer on 30th March, 1961, finally. Issue at once." It appears that on the same day the Sales Tax Officer passed another order to his peshi clerk. This order does not find place in the order-sheet. The same was passed on a chit of paper to the following effect: "The service of the process-server dated 19th September, 1960, is incomplete as it does not show as to who refused to accept the notice. The dealer has not filed returns and hence issue a f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... when the appeal was being heard before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (Judicial). The burden of this plea seems to be that the second order was not genuine or that it was manipulated subsequently. We are, however, not prepared to entertain any such plea because if the assessee was not satisfied about the genuineness or otherwise of the second order he should have asked for a specific question on that point. The genuineness of that order is not within the purview of any of the questions referred to us. Neither the appellate authority nor the revising authority have recorded any finding in regard to this question. We, therefore, refrain from entering into this controversy. The Sales Tax Officer appears to have passed the order on the o....