1976 (3) TMI 226

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o assess the transactions which were admittedly transacted beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the said officer, i.e., at Bhubaneswar and at Cuttack, when the dealer has neither applied for registration at Cuttack or Bhubaneswar or has not taken the required permission to file consolidated return as required under rule 26(2) of the O.S.T. Rules. (2) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer of Puri I Circle has jurisdiction to assess the sales turnover of the assessee arising at Bhubaneswar and Cuttack outside the territorial jurisdiction of Puri. (3) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment under section 12(8) of the O.S.T. Act in respect of the quarter ending 31st March, 196....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rise as propositions of law in view of the decision of the Full Bench. We would accordingly answer the first two questions against the assessee by saying: (1) In the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer, Puri I Circle, had jurisdiction to assess transactions which were admittedly transacted beyond his territorial jurisdiction, and (2) In the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessing officer of Puri I Circle had jurisdiction to assess the sales turnover of the assessee arising at Bhubaneswar and Cuttack outside the territorial jurisdiction of Puri. 4.. The third question is in relation to the proceeding for reassessment for the quarter ending 31st March, 1964. Original assessment for this quarter was complet....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing officer, this notice was issued on 12th February, 1967. If that fact is correct, certainly the notice to reopen the matter would be in time. The Tribunal, however, seems not to have accepted the plea of service of notice. He found that the order sheet maintained by the Sales Tax Officer was not true and further indicated: "........In view of the petition filed by Gouri Sankar Agarwalla, the signature appearing on the slip appears to be somewhat dubious and it cannot be said that really the notice has been duly served on the assessee........" Having found thus, the Tribunal erroneously examined the position with reference to the assessee's subsequent conduct of participation. A proceeding not initiated within the period of limitation i....