Shiv Steels vs State of Assam and Others

A.K. Goel, C.J.—This order will dispose of W. P. (C) No. 3178 of 2011, W. P. (C) No. 3107 of 2011 and W. P. (C) No. 3084 of 2011, as all the petitions involve identical questions raised by the same assessee. These petitions seek quashing of order of reassessment dated March 3, 2011 under the provisions of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993.

Case of the petitioner is that for the assessment years 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06, assessment of tax was made but since the same was barred by limitation u/s 19 of the Act, the same was set aside by the revisional authority vide order dated March 18, 2011. Thereafter, the assessing authority issued reassessment notice and proceeded to make reassessment. The notice of reassessment required the petitioner to appear before the respondent on or before 4th of April, 2010 but thereafter, adjournment was granted up to April 21, 2011. However, in the meantime ex parte assessment was made on March 31, 2011.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the reassessment was barred by limitation and once the assessment was quashed by the Commissioner, the assessing authority could not have proceeded with the reassessment. In any case the ex parte proceedings were not justified before the date of hearing.

The learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the reassessment was within limitation u/s 21 of the Act which provides for outer-limit of seven years if reassessment was made with the sanction of the Commissioner. In the present case, sanction was duly granted by the Commissioner on March 21, 2011 and, therefore, reassessment was within time. It was also submitted that quashing of earlier assessment as barred by limitation in absence of grant of sanction by the Commissioner did not debar the assessment being made after the sanction was granted. It was further submitted that as far as ex parte assessment is concerned, grievance of the petitioner could be considered by the assessing authority.

On due consideration, we are unable to find any merit in the first two submissions in view of sanction having been duly granted on March 21, 2011 u/s 21 of the Act. Thus, the assessment cannot be held to be barred by limitation nor quashing of earlier order debar fresh assessment being made in accordance with law after the sanction was granted. As regards giving of proper hearing to the petitioner, in view of stand of learned counsel for the Revenue the assessing authority can consider the view point of the petitioner and then finalise the assessment and may not give effect to the ex parte assessment. Accordingly, we dispose of these petitions with a direction that earlier ex parte assessment may not be acted upon and fresh assessment be made after giving hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner may appear before the assessing authority for the purpose on December 17, 2012.