MANSA RAM SUSHIL KUMAR Vs. ASSESSING AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by which the order dated 22nd January, 1963, of assessment of sales tax for two quarters ending 30th June, 1962, and 30th September, 1962, have been challenged.

(2.) THE petitioner is the sole proprietor of a firm known as Mansa Ram Sushil Kumar and is engaged in the business of selling oil at Ludhiana. This firm is registered under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Act), and also under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. It appears that the petitioner-firm has to file quarterly returns and for the two quarters ending 30th June, 1962, and 30th September, 1962, it filed the returns and paid the amount of tax in accordance with the returns which were filed as required Under Section 10 of the Act. On 11th December, 1962, the respondent issued a statutory notice Under Section 11 in Form S. T. XIV. The petitioner appeared before the respondent on 31st December, 1962, and produced the declaration form as required under the Act in Form S. T. XXII. By the impugned order the respondent did not accept the contention of the petitioner that sales had been made to registered dealers and created a liability of Rs. 35,185-59 np. It is unnecessary to state the other facts because the only question which is to be decided is whether the respondent had the power and the jurisdiction to make the order of assessment for the two quarters mentioned before prior to the expiry of the assessment year which admittedly was to end on 31st March, 1963.

(3.) THE petition has been referred by my learned brother Gurdev Singh, J. , to a Division Bench in view of a decision by D. K. Mahajan, J. , in Tara Chand Lajpat Rai v. The Excise and Taxation Officer Civil Writ No. 1123 of 1962 in which it has been held that the department could make the assessment on the quarterly or monthly returns when filed and once the assessment is made, the tax can be recovered. My learned brother Gurdev Singh, J. , however, felt doubtful about the correctness of such a view owing to the decision and the observations made in Mathra Parshad and Sons v. State of Punjab A. I. R. 1962 S. C. 745 in which the entire scheme of the Act was discussed by their Lordships.