KHUSHIRAM BEHARI LAL & CO. versus ASSESSING AUTHORITY, SANGRUR & ANR.

Citation: [1977] 1 S.C.R. 752 · Decided: 08-10-1976 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HANS RAJ KHANNA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
752 
KHUSHiRAM BEHARI LAL & CO. 
v. 
ASSESSING AUTHORITY, SANGRUR & ANR. 
October 8, 1976 
[H. R. KHANNA AND JASWANT SINGH, JJ.] 
fVrit jurisdiction of the lligh Court-Scope for interferellce with findings of 
iepa~tlnental authorities. 
In response to a notice from the assessing authority Uf!der the Punja'b General 
Sales Tax Act that the appeliant had not filed a return in respect of the assess-
ment year 1959-60. the appellant claimed that tho firm: had ceased to do any 
w·ork since February. 1961 and that a formal document to that effect was ex-
ecuted in August, 1961. The assessing authority made- an order of assessment 
in March 1962. In a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed' 
by the appeltant the High Court directed the Sales Tax Officer to enquire and 
repo1t if the appellant-firm had proved its dissolution in August 1961 or before 
the date oft assessment order. The Sales Tax Officer_ reported that it had not. 
The High Court itself examined the matter and came· to the same conclusion as 
that reached by the Sales Tax Officer. 
It alsQ' found that tho1igh intimation 
was required to be given under s. 16 of the Act regarding the dissolution of 
the firm \Vithin 30 days of such dissolution no such intin1ation \vas given under 
April, 1962 and dismissed the writ petition. 
Dismissing the appeal to this Court, · 
HELD: (1) There is no sufficient ground to interfere with the judgment 
of the High Court. The facts and circumstances referred to by the High Cour! 
throw a considerable doubt upon the correctness of the appellant's statement 
that it had stood dissolved in August, 1961. [754 D & BJ 
(2) The High Court Was dealing \vith th: matter on the writ side. In a: 
"''fit petition~ the scope for interference· with a finding of the departmental 
authorities is much more restricted and the court can normally interfere on.Ir 
if the finding is based upon extraneous or irrelevant evidence -or is otherwise 
perverse. The same cannot bo said of the finding of the sales tax authority 
embodied in its report sent to the High Court in the present C0tse. (75-4 C] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 442 of 1974. 
(From· the Judgment and Order dated the 17th of August, 1970 cf 
the Punjab & Haryana High/ Court in Civil Writ No. 413/621. 
V. C. Mahajan and 0. P. Sharma, for the App=lbnt. 
Harbans Singh, for Respondent No. 2. 
The Judgment of tho Court was delivered by 
KHANNA, ~-
This is an appeal on certificate agc1inst the judgment 
of the Punjab and Haryana High Court whereby the_ High Court hold 
that the appellant-firm had failed to prove that it bad stood dissolved 
on a dato prior to tho date of assessment, viz., March 121 1962. 
The appellant-firm carries on business as commission agents of 
cotton and food grain'-
In respect of the year 1959-60, the appel-
lant did not submit any return under the Punjab General Sales Tax 
Act. 
A notice was thereupon issued to the appellant-firm and the 
r 
' 1 
KHUSHIRAM BEl-IARILAL v. ASSESSING AUTHORITY (Klu111na, J.) 
7 53 
case was fixed fo~ July l, 1960. 
The appellant challenged the vali-
dity of the assessment proceedings by means of a writ petition in the 
High Court. 
The High Court during the pendency of the petition, 
stayed the proceedings. 
Ultimately, it seems, the writ petition was 
dismissed and the assessment proceedings were resumed on Novern-
ber 30, 1961. 
Various dates were fixed thereafter. 
February 17, 
1962 was fixed as the final date of hearing. 
On that date, intimation 
was given on behali of the appellant that.the appellant-firm had ceased 
to do any work since February 1961. It was also respresented that 
a formal document had been executed on August 8, 1961. 
The 
assessin,g authority despite that intimation proceeded to make an order 
of assessment dated March 12, 1962. 
The appellant thereupon filed 
another petition under article 226 of the Constitution in the Punjab 
High Court, praying for the- quashing of the assessment order. 
H 
was stated on behalf of tho appellant thnt the appellant-firm had been 
dissolved before the date of assessment order and as such, the sales 
tax authorities could not make an order for assessment. 
The High 
Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the assessment pro-
ceedings had been initiated long before the alleged date of dissolution 
of the firm. 
The appellant thereafter came up to this Court in appeal 
against the ~aid decision of the High Court.

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.