S.Rafat Alam, J. - (1.) In the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for the following relief : "(i) that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued quashing the notices dated December 10, 1985 issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Sector 3, Firozabad, respondent No. 2 for the assessment years 1982-83 (U.P. and Central), 1983-84 (U.P. and Central) and 1984-85 (U.P. and Central) for completing assessments as also for provisional assessment for the months April, 1985 to October, 1985 and thereby seeking to impose sales tax on the petitioner's turnover treating the petitioner No. 1 as not a new unit, collectively attached as annexure-5 ; 1(a) that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued quashing assessment orders dated December 26, 1985 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Sector 3, Firozabad, respondent No. 2 for the assessment years 1983-84 (U.P. and Central), 1984-85 (U.P.), and 1985-86 for the months of April to October, 1985 and filed collectively as annexure-9 to the writ petition : (b) that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued quashing the demand of Rs. 3,39,100 being tax imposed by the Sales Tax Officer, respondent No. 2 on the petitioners turnover of glass bangles for the assessment year 1983-84 (U.P. and Central), 1983-85 for the months of April to October, 1985 ; (ii) that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued in the nature of mandamus or prohibition prohibiting or restraining the Sales Tax Officer, Sector 3, Firozabad, respondent No. 2, from in any way imposing or realising any amount as sales tax on the turnover of glass bangles manufactured by the petitioner's unit ; (iii) that a suitable writ, order or direction be issued holding the petitioner's unit entitled for the grant of exemption under Section 4-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act ; (iv) that any other and further writ, order or direction, which this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, be also issued ; (v) that costs of the petition be awarded to the petitioners as against the respondents."
(2.) The short controversy involved in this writ petition is that whether a dealer can be called upon by the Sales Tax Officer for assessment and to deposit sales tax in spite of having been exempted from realising the same in view of the eligibility certificate granted under Section 4-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for short "the Act") and whether the Sales Tax Officer has jurisdiction to sit in judgment over the grant of eligibility certificate by the Joint Director of Industries or the authorities empowered in this regard.
(3.) Heard Shri Bharatji Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.;