1990 (5) TMI 218

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ership firm and a dealer under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976, hereinafter "the Act". It carries on the business of selling and supplying electrical goods. For the year ending 30th June, 1987, the petitioner was assessed by the Superintendent of Taxes by his order of assessment dated 20th March, 1989, summarily under section 9(4) of the Act. The summary assessment was made on the ground of failur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ved that though the case had been fixed for hearing by the Superintendent of Taxes on three different dates, the petitioner failed to appear on either of the dates and, as such, the Superintendent of Taxes was justified in making the best judgment assessment and that there was no ground for cancellation of the same. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders passed by the Superintendent of Taxes and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nsel for the petitioner. We have also heard Mr. M. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the Revenue. The filing of the petition for adjournment on 23rd February, 1989, a day before the date fixed for hearing, is not disputed. Apparently, this application had not been considered by the Superintendent of Taxes before making the summary assessment under section 9(4) of the Act. In our opinion, when an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the dealer is the partnership firm and the assessment could have been legally made only in the name of the firm. But in the instant case it has been made in the name of the partner which is not in accordance with law. We find force in the submission of the learned counsel. However, we do not propose to examine and decide the same in view of our aforesaid order setting aside the summary assessme....