SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(Ker) 329

V.V.KAMAT
SHERENE EUGINE – Appellant
Versus
ADDITIONAL SALES TAX OFFICER-I. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

V. V. KAMAT, J.

The only question for consideration is whether the petitioner is served in accordance with section 55B of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 as well as in accordance with the provision of rule 63 of the Rules made thereunder.

2. It is obvious that an assessment order under section 17(3) of the Act is required to be served in accordance with the above legal provisions.

3. The admitted position in the matter of service is that it was sent by registered post with acknowledgement due and was returned with the endorsement "left" on the postal cover and therefore it is necessary to consider it is proper service or a deemed service giving validity to the action under section 17(3) of the Act.

4. Bare reading of these statutory provisions would show that such notice has to be served if sent by registered post at the last known place of residence or business. It is obvious that it is not received by the addressee as a result of the endorsement "left".

5. Even the provisions of rule 63 are more than clear, specifically referring to rule 63(d) requiring that in the event of none of the modes specified therein is found to be practical, then it has to be affixed on s


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top