- (1.) AS affidavits have been exchanged between the parties we are disposing of this petition finally. In terms of Rule 13-A of the U. P. Sugarcane Purchase Tax Rule 1961, the petitioner sent an intimation under a registered cover to the ASstt. Sugar Commissioner on 19-11-1989 stating that the petitioner proposed to start its unit from 25-11-1987. Unfortunately, this intimation was received by the concerned officer on 12-11-1987. The option of the petitioner for payment of tax under the aforesaid provision was rejected by the Khandsari Inspector on the sole ground that the intimation had not reached the concerned officer 15 days before the start of the unit. The order of the Khandsari Inspector has been affirmed in appeal by the ASsistant Sugar Commissioner on the same ground.
(2.) FOR the petitioner, two decisions have been cited before us, one, dated 18-1-1989 in writ petition no 1641 of 1988 and the other, writ petition no. 11787 of 1988 decided on 29-10-1988, both of which do lend full support to the petitioner's contention. In both these cases, learned Judges took the view that if the intimation was despatched within time so as to reach the assessing officer on a date which ordinarily would have fallen 15 days before the start of the unit the delay of two or three days in the intimation reaching the assessing officer should not result in the rejection of the option exercised under Rule 13-A of the aforesaid Rule. The dictum of these two decisions fully applies to the facts of the present case. The petitioner had despatched the intimation by registered post on 9-11-1987 intimating that it will make crushing operation from 25-11-1987. This intimation had it reached the assessing officer by 10th would have been sufficient compliance with Rule 13-A. It however, reached only on the 12-11-1987. For the delay occasioned in the delivery of the registered cover, the petitioner should not be held responsible or made to suffer. That being so, the option exercised by the petitioner could not be rejected on the ground on which it has been rejected. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order dated 24-3-1988 (Annxeure-13) passed by the Khandsari Inspector and that dated 26-7-1988 passed by the Assistant Sugar Commissioner are both quashed. No order as to costs. Petition allowed. High Court Of Gauhati;