AMRISH CHANDRA SURENDRA KUMAR Vs. COMMISSIONER SALES TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are two references submitted by the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Agra, one arising out of proceedings under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and the other arising out of proceedings under the Central Sales Tax Act in respect of the same assessee, namely, M/s. Amrish Chandra Surendra Kumar of Agra.

(2.) IN respect of the assessment year 1957-58 two ex parte assessment orders were passed against the assessee, one under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and the other under the Central Sales Tax Act, because of the failure of the assessee to be present on the date of the hearing. The Sales Tax Officer rejected the account books of the assessee and made a best judgment assessment fixing the turnover at Rs. 3,60,000 under the U.P. Act and Rs. 30,000 under the Central Act. The assessee in due course filed appeals against the assessment orders which were dismissed as time-barred. The assessee had also moved an application under section 30 for setting aside the ex parte order, but the same was rejected. The assessee thereafter filed an appeal and then went up in revision against the order rejecting its application under section 30. The assessee also asked for a reference on this aspect, but the Judge (Revisions) has declined to make a reference. We are, therefore, not concerned with that aspect of the matter.

(3.) IT appears that at the time of the hearing of the application under section 11(1), it was contended on behalf of the assessee that after the Judge (Revisions) had condoned the delay, the appeals should had been remanded to the appellate authority for decision on the merits and the Judge (Revisions) should not have gone into the merits. We are of opinion that the assessee was not entitled to raise any such question because no such question was raised or argued at the time when the revision applications were heard. The question of law which this court can be called upon to answer must be a question arising out of the revisional order.