Prakash Krishna, J. - (1.) The present revision arises out of proceedings under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act relevant to the assessment year 1992-93. The applicant is carrying on the business of food grains in commission agency. On the February 1996 the original assessment order for the assessment year 1982-83 was passed. After receipt of certain information from the Trade Tax offer (SBI) the proceeding under Section 21 were shought to be taken by the department to assess the escaped turnover. The assessing officer passed an order on 20th of march, 1996 for issue of notice under Section 21 of the Act fixing 29th of March 1996. The notice was sent by registered AD as well as for fixation. The registered notice was sent vide dispatch No. 199 (a) dated 20.03.1996 and the notice for fixation was sent by dispatch No. 20.03.1996
(2.) The assessee after participating in assessment proceeding on few dates. Lets the case unattended. The assessing officer by the order dated 21st of September, 1996 reassessed the turnover and imposed tax, as the assessee failed to turn up in spite of several notices. This order was challenged before the deputy commissioner (appeals). In the appeal the assessee disputed the very jurisdiction of the assessing authority to initiate the reassessment proceeding to the ground that the notice initiating the reassessment proceeding was not validly served on him. Service of notice by affixation is no service in the eyes of law, in view of Rule 77 of U.P. Trade Tax Rules. The appellate authority rejected the said contention on the ground that the assessing authority served the notice after the following the procedure by affixation. The AD (acknowledgment due) does not contain either the seal of the post office or its report. Therefore, the service of notice by affixation was treated as valid service.
(3.) The tribunal in further appeal affirmed the order of the first appellate authority.;