view. According to counsel in Ghanshyam Das's case(') it was held that every step taken for the purpose of bringing the' turnover which has escaped asessment to tax must be taken within the period prescribed under the Act for conunencing the proceeding for bringing to tax turnover which has escaped assessment and therdore a notice issued under sub-s. (2) of s. 11 of the C.P. & Derar Sales Tax Act more than three years after the last day of the year of assessment is unauthorised, and no further proceeding for assessment may thereafter be had even in respect of the return duly submitted by the dealer. In our view the contention is wholly misconceived. In Ghanshyam Das's case(1 ) the Coun was dealing with a proceeding for assessment under the C.P. & Berar Sales Tax Act, 194 7, the relevant provisions whereof relating to assessment and re-assessment are similar to, but not identical wirh, the provisions of the Madhya Bharat Sales Tax Act, 1950. This Coun held in that case that a proceeding for assessment vi sales tax remains pending from the time when it is initiated until it is determined by a final order of assessment, and the turnover or any part thereof of a dealer has not escaped assessmen: so long as the assessment proceeding is not completed; that a proceeding of assessment commences against a registered dealer when he files his return, and against an unregistered dealer when the .Commissioner calls upon him to file the return of his turno»er: and that where the registered dealer ha not filed a return the proceeding commences when the Commissioner issues a notice either under s. 10(3) or under s. 11 (4) of the C.P. & Berar Sales Tax Act. and not till then. Under s. 11-A of the C.P. & Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, the Commissioner is entitled to re-assess or assess the turnover within three ·years from the expiry cf the period for which the tax i9 due and the turnover has either escaped assessment or has lx-.en under-assessed. This Coun in Ghamhyam Das's case(') in dealing with the case of a register~d dealer under the C.P. & Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, decided that the Sales Tax Authority had no jurisdiction to issue a notice of assessment after the expiry of three years in respect of the quarter other than that covered by the return mac\e by the dealer. or in respect of the quarters beyond three years from the date of the is.,ue of the notice where no return had been filed by the dealer. TI1ere is nothing in the judgment in Ghanshyam Da.s's cnse(') which suppons the view that if the dealer has made a return of his turnover, the assessing authority is incompetent to proceed to assess the turnover by issuing a notice calling upon the dealer to produce evidence to explain or support' !he return, after the expiry of the period prescribed under s. 11-A of the C.P. & Berar Sales Tax Act.
