1. Shri Abdul Karim is a general merchant at Kosgi dealing in trunks, umbrellas, crockery, aluminium utensils,' etc. The Sales Tax Officer, Mahboobnagar, disbelieving his books of accounts estimated, to the best of his judgment, the gross turnover at Rs. 50,000, exempted turnover at Rs. 7,500, and taxable turnover at Rs. 42,500, for the year 1954-55. In appeal, the learned Deputy Commissioner, Appellate, reduced these turnovers to Rs. 35,000, Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 30,000 respectively. Against this order of the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Shri Abdul Karim preferred this appeal before us.
2. Shri S. N. Munir, Sales Tax Practitioner, on behalf of the appellant and Shri Salahuddin, State Representative, appeared before us. Heard their arguments.
3. On going through the assessment record we find that the notice dated 9th December, 1955, issued under Rule 14 to the appellant directing him to show cause why his turnover should not be determined at Rs. 35,000, was signed by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Mahboobnagar. Admittedly he was not empowered to issue such a notice inasmuch as an Assistant Sales Tax Officer is authorised, under the Act, to deal only with cases where the turnovers do not exceed Rs. 30,000. The notice, issued by him in the instant case beyond his jurisdiction, was therefore illegal. In the result, the Sales Tax Officer, Mahboobnagar, who was the competent assessing authority in the present case, had assessed the turnovers of the appellant without issuing any notice, and his assessment order was therefore illegal.
4. It is further seen from the same record that even the demand notice, dated 2nd January, 1956, relating to the assessment under consideration was issued by the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, trespassing his jurisdiction.
5. Though this point was not raised in the grounds of appeal, it being a fact apparent from records affecting the very validity of the proceedings we, suo motu, hold the assessment illegal and set it aside.
The Sales Tax Officer is directed to start assessment proceedings against the appellant, afresh, according to law.