LAWS(P&H)-1996-8-47

SOBBER AGENCIES Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On August 08, 1996
SOBBER AGENCIES Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application by the assessee under section 22 (2) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for short, "the Act"), seeking a direction to the Sales Tax Tribunal, Punjab, for referring the following questions of law of this Court for opinion :

(2.) AT the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee-petitioner informed that he would press for a direction with respect to questions (c) and (d) only. The assessee-firm failed to file returns for the assessment year 1981-82. A notice was issued by the Assessing Authority under section 11 (2) of the Act. Adjournments were sought by the assessee-firm from time to time. A notice came to be issued by the Assessing Authority ultimately on March 5, 1987 proposing assessment on a gross turnover of Rs. 6,00,000. The business premises of the assessee had been inspected on June 29, 1983 and a book of ST forms No. XXII from Serial Nos. M-762401 to M-762500 was found. It was noticed that purchases to the tune of Rs. 1,44,662 had been made against some used forms in the assessment year 1982-83 and purchases to the tune of Rs. 3,62,772 were found to have been made against some forms which were undated. The purchases, which were found against undated forms, were treated to be the purchases relating to the assessment year 1981-82. It is against this background that a gross turnover of Rs. 6,00,000 was determined and assessment was made accordingly by order dated May 23, 1989.

(3.) THE plea of the respondents is that there was no material on record to accept the petitioner-assessee's plea that purchases against ST forms XXII related to tax-free goods only. If the assessee actually purchased tax-free goods, there was no occasion for the assessee to make use of the ST-forms XXII. Therefore, the conclusion drawn by the Assessing Authority is said to be a correct one and no question of law is said to arise therefrom. It is also pointed out that a notice under section 11 (2) of the Act had already been issued by the Assessing Authority on September 12, 1983 and proceedings for assessment had already commenced within the prescribed period of 5 years, as laid down under section 11 (5) of the Act. It is also pointed out that another notice proposing assessment at a gross turnover of Rs. 6,00,000 was also issued within time and, therefore, the assessment was not time-barred.