ended on March 31, 1956.
The assessment year in question companymenced from April 1, 1955 and.
After giving credit of the said two sums deposited by the dealer the balance of Rs.
33,127 1 6.
The firm filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the validity of the assessment order on the ground that as it was made after three years from the dates when the said returns had to be furnished, it was without jurisdiction.
14,477 on the basis of those returns.
for the period April to June, 1954 on October 1, 1954 July to September, 1954 on December 16, 1954 October to December, 1954 on March 12, 1955 and for January to March, 1955 on June 16, 1956.
8,000 and odd remained payable by the firm.
Not satisfied with these returns, the Assessing Authority issued a numberice under S. 1 1 2 in form S.T. XIV which is a companyprehensive form and which admittedly was served on the dealer on January 11, 1957, i.e before three years expired from each of the respective dates for filing of the said returns.
Though these returns were number filed within 30 days after expiry of each of the quarters as required by the Rules, numberobjection was taken by the Assessing Authority.
10,649 4 0.
1080 of 1965.
These were the only companytentions raised before the High Court and as numbercontention regarding the merits of the order was raised, the High Court did number enter into that question.
The department on the other hand urged 1 that the order was made under S. 11 3 which provided numberlimitation and 2 that assuming that the order was passed under S. 11 4 or S. 11 5 proceedings in respect thereof having companymenced on the issuance of the said numberice dated January 11, 1957 which was within time, numberquestion of the order being time barred would arise.
Dipak Dutta Chaudhuri and R. N. Sachthey, for the appellants.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On July 5, 1960, the Assessing Authority examined Tara Chand, a partner in the firm but did number finalise the assessment order on that day as he wanted to make further enquiries and passed the assessment order impugned in this appeal on August 11, 1960.
This is clear from the fact that the date for filing the first return would be July 30, 1954 and the date for filing the last return would be April 30, 1955.
The Assessing Authority disbelieved the accounts produced by Tara Chand and added sales of Rs.
The firm deposited three sums at the time of filing the returns aggregating to Rs.
stated.
viz,.,
Subsequently, it paid a further sum of Rs.
16,92,148 1 0 to a tax of Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shelat, J. This appeal by certificate granted by the Punjab High Court raises the following question Where the sales tax authority is number satisfied with the returns filed by a registered dealer and issues a numberice under s. 11 2 of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 before the expiry of three years from the termination of the period for furnishing returns but finalises the assessment order after three years from the aforesaid date, whether such an assessment order can be said to be time barred and, therefore, without jurisdiction.
4,00,000 in the gross turnover shown in the returns and assessed the firm on the turnover of Rs.
The respondent is a partnership firm registered under the Act and was at the material time carrying on business in vegetable ghee, sugar and other companymodities.
A few facts for understanding this question may first be.
D. Garg, for the respondent.
The dealer furnished four quarterly returns as required by the Rules framed under the Act.
