AVTAR SINGH RANJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 22 (2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, requiring the Sales Tax Tribunal to refer the following questions of law for our opinion :

(2.) AT the hearing it is conceded that only the first question of law arises. So, in fact, the application now will be whether the said question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal, and the Tribunal was in error in not referring the same to this court in an application made to it under Section 22 (1) of the Act.

(3.) THE petitioner is a firm. It is a registered dealer under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act ). The petitioner deals in sugar, vegetable ghee, gur and other commodities. The returns are filed quarterly. For the year 1956-57, a notice in form S. T. XIV was issued calling upon the petitioner for appearing on 4th September, 1958. The assessment was made by the assessing authority on 24th July, 1961. It appears that no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner on the 15th July, 1961, and, therefore, an ex parte assessment was made on 24th July, 1961. In the. ex parte assessment, all the deductions claimed by the petitioner were disallowed and a tax liability for Rs. 39,960. 56 was created. An appeal against this order by the petitioner failed. On revision -to the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner against the order of the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner in appeal, it was held that there was no evidence on the record by which it would be said that the best judgment proceedings has been initiated within the period of three years and the assessment being a best judgment assessment, the order of the assessing authority could not be sustained. The Financial Commissioner by his order dated 16th March, 1966, issued a notice under Section 21 (3) of the Act calling upon the petitioner to show cause why the order of the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner be not set aside. By his order dated 21st April, 1966, the Financial Commissioner set aside the order dated 23rd March, 1965, of the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner and restored that of the assessing authority. This order was communicated to the petitioner's counsel on 3rd May, 1966. It is noteworthy that the Financial Commissioner took the view that there was no "best judgment assessment". It was found that there was no default on the part of the petitioner under Section 11 (3) of the Act. The petitioner's case throughout was that Section 11 (3) does not apply and the case was really covered by Section 11 (4 ). On this basis, an application was made to the Sales Tax Tribunal which had replaced the Financial Commissioner under Section 22 (1) of the Act. This application was rejected by the Tribunal with the observation that the case clearly fell within the provisions of Section 11 (3) of the Act. The petitioner's contention that the case fell within Section 11 (4) was negatived. The application for referring the questions of law was refused on the ground that "the point of law was quite clear and there was no room for any argument". The petitioner being dissatisfied, moved this court under Section 22 (2) of the Act, as already stated.