TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (2) TMI 759
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....med on September 17, 1993 (annexure P1) and tax deduction at eight per cent in respect of cotton seed cake (khal) was also reflected in the assessment order. However, on September 26, 1995, a notice was issued by the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner-cum-Revisional Authority, under section 21 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for brevity, "the Act"), proposing to make reassessment. The dealer-petitioner filed reply contesting the proposal to reassess (annexures P3 and P4). However, no action was taken. On June 18, 1996, the Assessing Authority intimated the dealer-petitioner that definite information is in the possession of the officer, which leads to the belief that the turnover of his business was liable to reassessment.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... reliance upon the judgments rendered in the cases of Mittal Silicate & Oil Mills, Bathinda v. State of Punjab [1985] STI 239 (Trib) and D. Vir & Co., Abohar v. State of Punjab [1982] STI 129 (Trib). He has further submitted that in a similar situation when reassessment was framed on the basis of audit objection, a Division Bench of this court in the case of Haryana Co-operative Sugar Mills Limited, Rohtak v. State of Haryana [1997] 107 STC 103; [1996] 8 PHT 144, had held that reassessment cannot be framed merely on the basis of audit objection because it would not constitute information as per the provisions of law. Mr. Goyal has maintained that while forming the opinion, the Division Bench has placed reliance on the judgment of the honour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dealing with reassessment under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act were under consideration, which are in pari materia to section 11A of the Act. The Division Bench in para 4 has held as under: (page 105 of STC) "The question that arises for our consideration is whether the audit note as received by the Assessing Authority was 'definite information' within the meaning of section 31 of the Act. In our opinion, the answer has to be in the negative. In the opinion of the audit party the tax was leviable under section 9 and on receipt of the note the Assessing Officer changed his opinion and re-opened the assessment so as to levy tax under section 9 of the Act. The opinion of the audit party cannot constitute information on the basis o....