HAJI LATIF ABDULLA Vs. BOARD OF REVENUE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE circumstances in which this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed are that on 7th June, 1956, the Sales Tax Officer, Raipur, made an order holding that no tax was payable by the petitioner inasmuch as out of the entire gross turnover of Rs. 8,12,114-13-3 as determined by him Rs. 10,234-5-9 represented sales to the registered dealers, goods of the value of Rs. 4,07,651-6-3 were transferred to the head office in Calcutta and the branch office at Nipani, and Rs. 3,94,229-1-3 represented the price of sales made in the course of inter-State trade. The Commissioner of Sales Tax thought that this order of the Sales Tax Officer was prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. He therefore issued a notice to the petitioner in Form No. XXV on 11th April, 1958, for revising under Section 22-B of the C. P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the order dated 7th June, 1956. The petitioner's objection to the validity of the notice and other objections to the revision of the order dated 7th June, 1956, were rejected by the Commissioner, who on 6th June, 1958, made an order setting aside the order dated 7th June, 1956, of the Sales Tax Officer and remanding the case for a fresh assessment in accordance with the directions given by him. The petitioner then filed an appeal before the Board of Revenue, which was dismissed on 28th October, 1958. Its application under Section 23 (1) of the Act for stating the case to this Court was also rejected by the Board of Revenue. Thereupon the petitioner filed an application in this Court under Section 23 (2) (b) of the Act for a direction to the Board to state the case and refer to this Court certain questions of law arising out of the Board's order of remand. This application under Section 23 (2) (b) was allowed by us on 20th March, 1962, and the Tribunal was directed to state the case and refer to this Court two questions of law. That reference is still pending in this Court.

(2.) IT appears that while the Tribunal has yet to state the case as directed by this Court on 20th March, 1962, the Sales Tax Officer recommenced assessment proceedings pursuant to the order of remand made by the Commissioner of Sales Tax on 6th June, 1958, and passed an order on 25th June, 1963, assessing the petitioner to sales tax amounting to Rs. 12,078-75 np. and imposing on it a penalty of Rs. 2,000.

(3.) THE petitioner's contention is that the Sales Tax Officer had no jurisdiction to make an order of assessment during the pendency of the reference under Section 23 of the Act, and that in any case he should have stayed the assessment proceedings till the disposal of the reference when it was brought to his notice that the reference was pending in this Court. The petitioner also complains that as all along he remained under the bona fide impression that the assessment proceedings would not be resumed until after the reference was answered by this Court he could not produce before the Sales Tax Officer the material he intended to for showing that no sales tax was payable by him. The prayer of the applicant is that the order of assessment dated 25th June, 1963, passed by the Sales Tax Officer be quashed.