Bishal Trading vs State of Assam and Others

Adarsh Kumar Goel, C.J.—This order will dispose of W.P. (C) Nos. 936, 695, 942 and 937 of 2009 as it is stated by learned counsel for the parties that all these petitions involve identical question of validity of suo motu revisional order of assessment. The petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 936 of 2009 challenges notice dated November 28, 2007 u/s 82 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with section 9(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act 1956 and order of assessment dated March 6, 2008 alleging that order of assessment of turnover of the petitioner of the year 2005-06 at Rs. 2,46,44,934 was erroneous as the petitioner itself had declared turnover at Boxirhat Check gate to be Rs. 2,75,60,629.

The case of the petitioner is that declaration relied upon in the impugned notice was non-existent and has not been annexed to the notice. In the return the petitioner had claimed much lesser turnover but on the basis of best judgment assessment the turnover was revised by the assessing authority. If the revisional authority wanted to further revise the same, it could be on the basis of tangible material which the petitioner was entitled to be informed.

Notice was issued and record was called for. No reply has been filed.

Since no declaration as referred to in the notice for causing exercise of suo motu revisional power was furnished to the petitioner nor annexed to the notice, nor has been produced before this court and thus the petitioner did not have any opportunity to rebut the same, the revisional order based on the basis of alleged declaration which the petitioner has disputed cannot be sustained. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the impugned order of the revisional authority is set aside. It is, however, made clear that the revisional authority will be at liberty to pass fresh order after due opportunity to the petitioner. The petitioner may appear before the revisional authority for the purpose on March 4, 2013.