DOMA SAO MOHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ application was dismissed summarily earlier by a Bench of this Court. The petitioner went up in appeal to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court in the decision Doma Sao Mohanlal v. State of Bihar and Ors. A.I.R. 1971 S.C. 1628 set aside the order of summary dismissal and remanded the case to this Court. Thereafter, this writ application was formally admitted and proceeded to hearing.

(2.) On the basis of the materials placed before us from the statements in the writ application and its annexures, the facts may be stated in a narrow compass. Doma Sao was the common ancestor. He died long long ago. He had four sons, Kishun Lal Sao, Biri Lal Sao, Mohan Lal Sao and Rameshwar Sao. All were members of a joint Hindu family. The undivided Hindu family was carrying on business of gold and gold ornaments at Dinapore, which is a place situated in the district of Patna but outside Patna town. It appears, in or about the year 1932, the Hindu undivided family opened a shop at Muradpur in the town of Patna. The Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1944, came into force sometime in the year 194.4, according to which a dealer was required to take out a sales tax registration certificate. The business of the Hindu undivided family was carried on under the name and style of Doma Sao Kishun Lal, both at Patna and Dinapore. But it appears, as I shall presently show hereinafter, that the firm had obtained two sales tax registration certificates, one for the Patna business bearing registration certificate No. PT-II-236, and another for the Dinapore business, the registration certificate of which bore the number PT-I-6.

(3.) The assessment proceedings were started against, the dealer, Doma Sao Kishun Lal, carrying on business at Patna for assessment of sales tax for six quarters, namely, the last two quarters of the financial year 1945-46 and the four quarters of 1946-47. A sum of rupees nine thousand and odd seems to have been assessed as tax payable by Doma Sao Kishun Lal. This sum, according to the petitioner's case, which does not seem to be in dispute, was paid. The commercial taxes department, however, went up in appeal to the Commissioner from the assessment order passed by the Superintendent of Commercial Taxes. The Commissioner by his order dated 11th September, 1948, remanded the case to the Deputy Commissioner for reassessment. It is not necessary to enter into the history of the delay. Suffice it to say that after about fourteen years, revised assessment was made on 29th June, 1962. According to the revised assessment, a tax of rupees forty thousand and odd became payable by the firm Doma Sao Kishun Lal in respect of the period when it was carrying on business as a Hindu undivided family. This revised assessment was challenged in appeal and seems to have been upheld. It was challenged in revision before the Board of Revenue. The learned Member, Board of Revenue, affirmed the assessment by his order dated 5th February, 1964, a copy of which is annexure A1 to the writ application.