COMMISSIONER SALES TAX Vs. BHOLA NATH LAXMI NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I agree that the question should be answered in the affirmative.

(2.) THE assessee alleges that he had made a mistake in setting out the figure of admitted turnover in the application under section 30 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. If it is found that it was a bona fide mistake, the sales tax authorities are bound to allow its rectification. It is nothing more than an amendment sought for, and to be granted, in the interests of justice. Such rectification must be considered as reinstating the figure of admitted turnover to its correct position as on the date of making the application under section 30. The view taken by the Sales Tax Officer and the appellate authority is clearly wrong and I would agree with the order made by the Additional Judge (Revisions). It is not necessary, it seems to me, to decide whether an assessee is entitled, at the time of applying under section 30, to admit a tax liability different from that admitted when filing his return.

(3.) THE facts briefly stated are these : An ex parte assessment was made against the assessee in respect of the assessment year 1965-66 because of the assessee's failure to appear before the Sales Tax Officer on the appointed date. The assessment order was served upon the assessee on 21st December, 1967. On 15th January, 1968, the assessee moved an application under section 30 of the Act for setting aside the ex parte assessment order on the ground that he had been prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the Sales Tax Officer on the appointed date. As required by the proviso to section 30, the assessee deposited a sum of Rs. 45.86 by way of tax on the admitted turnover of Rs. 3,103.73. At the time of the hearing of this application an objection was raised that there was a deficiency of 70 paise in the payment of the admitted tax inasmuch as on the admitted turnover of Rs. 3,103.73 as shown in the application the tax worked out was Rs. 46.56. Thereupon the assessee moved an application supported by an affidavit that the figure of the admitted turnover as mentioned in the application under section 30 was wrong, and the actual admitted turnover was Rs. 2,135.41, upon which the tax payable worked out to Rs. 32.00 only. Thus according to the assessee the tax already paid by him was more than the admitted tax required to be paid. This application was moved on 29th January, 1968.