HARDEODAS JAGANNATH Vs. THEE STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are brought by certificate from the judgment of the High Court of Assam and Nagaland dated April 4, 1963 in Civil Rule No. 90 of 1960 and Civil Rule No. 382 of 1961, whereby the High Court dismissed the petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution filed by the appellant.

(2.) M/s. Hardeo Das Jagan Nath (hereinafter called the 'appellant') is a partnership firm carrying on business at Mawkhar Shillong in the District of United Khasi and Jaintia Hills. By a notification issued under Rule 6 of the Assam Sales Tax Rules 1947, the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam fixed May 20, 1948 as the date by which the dealers of Shillong administered area had not make applications for registration under the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947 (17 of 1947), hereinafter called the 'Act'. By notification dated April 15, 1948, the Government of India had extended the provisions of the Act with slight modifications to the administered area in Shillong under Section 4 of the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act 1947. The appellant got itself registered under the Act. Upto the half yearly return periods ending September 30, 1957, the appellant was assessed to sales-tax and the tax was realised by the Sales Tax Authorities. On March 6, 1950 the Superintendent of Taxes, Shillong, respondent No. 4 raided the business premises of the appellant and seized the account books etc. The appellant filed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court. By its order dated June 3, 1960, the High Court directed the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes, Assam to return the seized books and documents within three weeks of the date of the order to the appellant. As directed by the High Court, the documents were returned to the appellant but on the basis of the information received from the account books the Superintendent of Taxes issued notices dated April 4, 1950 under Section 19A of the Act for reassessment of the appellant in respect of the half yearly return periods ending on September 30, 1956, March 31, 1957 and September 30, 1957. Thereafter, ex parte reassessment was made for the return period ending September 30, 1956 by an order dated July 8, 1959 and for return periods ending March 31, 1957 and September 30, 1957 by orders dated July 24, 1959 and tax amounting to Rupees 1,22,933/- was levied for these three periods. A further sun of Rs. 47,504.70 was levied in respect of the return period ending March 31, 1958, by an ex parte assessment order dated March 23, 1959. For the other return period ending September 30, 1958, a sum of Rs. 49,427.90 was levied by an ex parte assessment order dated April 8, 1959. For these two return periods a penalty of Rs. 1,000/- in respect of each return was also levied by two separate orders dated June 27, 1959. Thus the total amount of sales-tax and penalty amounting to Rs. 2,19,865.60 in respect of the five return periods was levied. The appellant paid Rs. 20,074.68 at the time of original assessments in respect of the periods ending on September 30, 1956, March 31, 1957 and September 30, 1957.

(3.) The appellant thereafter filed appeals against all the seven ex parte orders before the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes, Assam. Along with the memoranda of appeals for the periods ending March 31, 1958 and September 30, 1958, two separate applications were made by the appellant alleging that it was not necessary to pay the assessed tax since the provisions of Section 30 of the Act as amended did not apply to the case and it was prayed that appeals should be admitted without payment of the assessed tax. The contention of the appellant was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner though he reduced the amount of deposit for the periods ending March 31, 1958 and September 30, 1958. The appellant moved the Commissioner of Taxes in revision, but the order of the Assistant Commissioner was affirmed by the Commissioner of Taxes though he reduced the amount further. On the application of the appellant the matter was referred to the High Court which held that the amended Section 30 of the Act was intra vires. In the meantime, the appellant also applied in respect of the appeals relating to the periods ending September 30, 1956, March 31, 1957 and September 30, 1957, as well as the penalty appeals of periods ending on March 31, 1958 and September 30, 1958 and prayed for admission of these appeals without payment of the assessed tax. In this case also the amount was reduced by the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes but the matter was kept pending till the disposal of the reference by the High Court. On May 21, 1960, the appellant filed separate petitions before the Assistant Commissioner praying that as the financial condition of the appellant was not good the appellant may be allowed to furnish reasonable security in lieu of cash and the appeal may be admitted on such security. By his order dated May 23, 1960 the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes fixed June 8, 1960 for payment of the amount required for admission of the appeals, failing which the appeals were ordered to be dismissed. The appellant then moved the Commissioner praying that in view of his financial difficulty he should be allowed to furnish reasonable security in lieu of cash to be paid. The application was rejected by the Commissioner on June 21, 1960. Thereafter all the five appeals were rejected by a common order dated June 22, 1960 and the two appeals against the imposition of penalty were also summarily rejected by an order dated June 22, 1960. The appellant was further asked to show cause why penalty should not have been imposed in respect of the periods ending September 30, 1956, March 31, 1957 and September 30, 1957. The appellant filed a petition to the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, being Civil Rule No. 90 of 1960 praying for a writ to quash the order of the Commissioner dismissing the appeals in respect of the five periods and for further reliefs. The appellant also filed another petition under Article 226, being Civil Rule No. 382 of 1961 asking for similar reliefs with regard to the periods ending March 31, 1959, September 30, 1959, March 31, 1960, September 30, 1960 and March 31, 1961. The writ petitions were dismissed by the High Court by a common judgment dated April 4, 1963.