TAX OFFICER-CUM-REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER & ORS. versus DURG TRANSPORT COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. DURG

Citation: [1971] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 988 · Decided: 30-07-1971 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.S. HEGDE · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

988 
A 
TAX OFFICER.CUM-REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER 
B 
c 
D 
& ORS. 
v. 
DURG TRANSPORT COMPANY (PVT.) LTD. DURG 
July 30, 1971 
(K. S. HEGDE AND A. N: GROVER, JJ.) 
Madhya Pradesh Motor Vehicles (Taxation of Passe11gers) Act. 1959. 
ss. 6, 7 and 8-A.sses.ree not filing return-Proceedings under s. 7 have to 
be taken within one year-Escaped assessment, meaning of. 
Where an assessee liable to pay passenser tax under the 
Madhya 
Pradesh Motor Vehicles (Taxation of Passenscrs) Act, 1959 submita no 
return as required by s. 5 nor niakes the required deposit under s. 6 the 
assessec escapes assessment and proceedings under s. 7 will have to be taken 
within the period of ono. year mentioned in s. 8. [99IAJ 
When the liability to tax is evaded by one method or the other there 
is au escaped assessment. The term escaped assessment includes both rton-
assessment as well as under assessment. [9900) 
Clv!L APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2289 of 
1968. 
Appeal from the judgment and order dated August 18, 1967 
of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc. Petition No. 640 of 
E 
1966. 
r 
G 
H 
I. N. Shroff, for the appellants. 
M. N. Phadke, and K. L. Hathi, for the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Heade, J.-This is an appeal by certificate arising from the 
decision of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Miscellaneous 
!'etition No. 640 of 1966 on its file. The asscsscc is a Transport 
Operator. It was liable to pay passenger tax under Madhya Pra· 
desh Motor Vehicles (Taxation of Passengers) Act, 1959-hcre-
inafter referred to as "the Act". It is said that it failed to pay the 
tax due from it for the period from October 1, 1961 to May 6, 
1962. Admittedly it submitted no return as required by section 
5 of the Act, nor did it make the required deposit under section 
6 of that Act. No action appears to have been taken against It 
till November 6, 1963 on which date the Tax Officer issued to it 
a notice under section 7 of the Act. Thereafter he proceeded to 
assess it. The impugned assessment order was made on June 19, 
1965. 
That order was challenged before the Madhya Pradesh 
(ll.T.O.V. DUllG TRANSPOllT Htgde,J.) 
High Court by means of a writ petition under sections 226 and 
227 of the Constitution. The High Court accepted that petition 
and quashed the impugned order. 
The question before this Court is whether the order of the 
High Court is sustainable. The only question that ca.Jls for deci· 
sion in this appeal is whether the proceedinas initiated by the Tax 
Officer by means of a notice under section 7 of the Act was 
beyond the time prescribed and therefore the proceedings taken 
were not maintainable against !he assessee. In order to answer 
this question, we shall read sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Act. 
Section (5) Submission of returns.-(!) In respect of the stage 
carriage or stage carries held by him, the operator shall deliver 
or cause to be delivered to the Tax Officer or to such prescribed 
officer as the Tax Officer may specify a return in the prescribed 
form and manner, either daily or at such intervals as ma.y be 
prescribed : 
919 
A 
B 
c 
Provided that different rules may be prescribed for the pur-
pose of this sub-section in relation to fleet-owner from those in 
D 
relation to other operators. 
12) When any return is received by a prescribed officer he 
shall forward it to the Tax Officer within the prescribed period 
and in the prescribed manner. 
E 
Section (6) Tax to be paid every month into Government Trea-
sury.-The tax payable during any month in accordance with the 
returns submitted under section 5 shall be paid into a Government 
treasury by the operator and the receipt evidencing such payment 
forwarded to the Tax Officer, on or before such date or dates of 
the month immediately succeeding as may be prescribed in the 
case of fleet-owners and othe(' operators. 
. Section (7) Procedure where no returns are submitted, etc.-ln 
the following cases, that is to say-
(a) Where no returns have been submitted by the 
operator in respect of any stage carriage for any month 
or portion thereof; or 
. 
lb) where the returns submitted by the operator in 
respect of any stage carriage for any month or portion 
thereof appear to the Tax Officer to be incorrect or in· 
complete; 
the Tax ~cer shall, after givi_ng th~ operator a responsible op-
.\)Ortunity, m case (a~ ~f makmg his represcntabon if any, and 
m case (b) of estabhshing the correctness and completeness of 

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