1997 (1) TMI 518

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uthority against the assessment order dated April 29, 1971. 2.. The contention of the assessee is that the said assessment order was not served on it at all and it came to know of the assessment order only when the sum due under the assessment order was sought to be recovered by the Revenue, after a period of about ten years. The assessee's further case is that after coming to know of the assessment order, when the distraint was effected, it got the certified copy on June 30, 1981 and the appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was filed on July 23, 1981. 3.. The contention of the Revenue is that the assessment order was served on the assessee by affixture, as provided under rule 52(d) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessee's factory was on strike and so the other modes prescribed under clauses (a) to (c) of rule 52(1) of the Rules could not be resorted to. He also points out that when the affixture was sought to be made, the assessee was not found at the relevant address, as can be seen from the endorsement of the process server. 7.. The respondent/assessee remains unrepresented. So we have heard only the learned counsel for the Revenue. 8.. In our view, there is absolutely no merit in the submission made by the learned counsel for the Revenue. Rule 52(1) of the Rules runs as follows: "1. The service on a dealer of any notice, summons or order under the Act or these Rules may be effected in any of the following ways, namely: (a) by giving or tende....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ected, affixture mode prescribed in clause (d) was resorted to. Only in that context, this Court observed as follows: "The modes of service referred to in clauses (a) to (c) are only alternative and not cumulative and, therefore, it cannot be said that all the above three modes have to be exhausted before the service by affixture can be effected under clause (d). It is not in dispute that one of the modes of service contemplated under clause (c) is service of notice by registered post, and such service has been found to be ineffective in this case. Therefore, the assessing authority was justified in proceeding to serve the assessment order by affixing it in the petitioner's place of business under rule 52(d)." (emphasis supplied) Here ita....