- (1.) By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks to challenge the action of the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes, Respondent No. 3 in initialing suo moto revisional proceedings, and set aside the order of assessment and direct the Superintendent of Taxes to forfeit the amount of taxes u/s 13B of the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as 'Sales Tax Act'.
(2.) Few basic facts need be noted - The petitioner firm is an assessee, it submitted its return of turn over for the period ending 30th September, 1983 having paid full taxes. Subsequently, the petitioner was served with notice u/s 9 (2) of the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1956. (The petitioner produces ail Books of Account in support of his return. During period ending 30th September, 1983 a total sale of C.I. Sheets amounting to Rs. 19,97,902.00 was made out of which sales amounting to Els, 18,38,782.00 were made to the Director of Food & Civii Supplies, while the balance of Rs. 1,59,120/- was made to others. Sales amounting to Rs. 6,85,495.00 were made on account of sales on goods purchased locally. The Director of Civil Supplies deducted tax @ 4% on the total sales made to the Director of Civil Supplies as per Section 22(5) of the Sales Tax Act. This deduction at the source was to the tune of Rs. 70,722.00 which was deposited in the Government Treasury. A deduction of Rs. 6,85,495/- was allowed by the Superintendent of Taxes, on account of locally purchased goods, who completed the assessment vide order dated 21.4.84. An amount of Rs. 50,477/ was determined by the Superintendent of Taxes as payable by the petitioner. Adjudging the amount of Rs. 700,722/- deducted at the source u/s 22(5) of the Act, a sum of Rs. 20,455/- was found to be paid in excess. What followed thereafter is a notice dated 23.10.92 by the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes u/s 20(1) of the Act to initiate suo moto revisional proceeding. The ground stated was that the deduction allowed by the Superintendent of Taxes of Rs. 6,85,495/- on account of locally purchased goods, was erroneous. The petitioner filed his objection vide letter dated 11.11.92 which stood rejected by order dated 30.11.92. The assessment order dated 24.1.84 was set aside and the Superintendent of Taxes was directed to make a fresh assessment in the light of the observations made. It was further directed to forfeit the amount of tax on sales of Rs. 6,85,492/- u/s 13B of the Act. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Assam Board of Revenue which also metwith dismissal vide order dated 15.12.94. Hence this present petition.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the. impugned action is bad in law and without jurisdiction, at any rate, the direction to forfeit the amount of tax on sales of Rs. 6,85,492/- would not have been legally made. Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent State, on the other hand, maintained that the impugned order and action is perfectly right and does not call for any interference.;