JAY KUMAR BARDIA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the assessment order of the taxing authority under the Assam General Sales Tax (AGST) Act and the revisional order thereto. He is also aggrieved by the order of compulsory registration as "dealer" under Section 12 of the Act.

(2.) The petitioner is engaged in the business of setting up Pandal/Shamiana including setting of furniture and fixtures, lights, floor covering and similar articles in the name and style of M/s. Chakkeswari Bhandar. The petitioner is the sole proprietor of the business establishment. According to the petitioner since the business in which he is engaged is in the nature of services for reward and not by way of sale and supply of materials, he is not required to be registered under the provisions of the Act and consequently, is also not liable to any tax.

(3.) The respondent No. 4 i.e. the Senior Superintendent of Taxes, Silchar, Assam issued the notice dated 06.11.1995 directing the petitioner to produce the books of accounts and other related documents by 16.11.1995 for verification and subsequently, by notice dated 11.01.1996, the petitioner was directed to show cause as to why compulsory registration should not be made or affected. The books of accounts of the petitioner were seized on 17.06.1996 on the ground of petitioner's failure to get himself registered under the Act. After such seizure, the respondent No. 4 issued two notices dated 19.06.1996 and 04.07.1996 for production of books of accounts and to show cause why the compulsory registration should not be affected and other panel action should not be taken against the petitioner.