- (1.) Heard Sri Ashok Kumar for the petitioner and Sri C.B. Tripathi, Special Counsel for the State of U.P. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated March 9, 2007 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-I, Trade Tax, Ghaziabad Zone, Ghaziabad (respondent No. 2) and notice dated March 14, 2007 issued by the Deputy Commissioner (Assessment)-2, Trade Tax, Ghaziabad (respondent No. 3) for the assessment year 2000-01, by which in exercise of power under section 21(2) of the Trade Tax Act, permission for reassessment was granted and accordingly, the assessing authority has issued the notice for reassessment.
(2.) The petitioner is a company engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of loudspeaker parts, namely, paper cone, dust cap and spider. For the assessment year 2000-01, the petitioner was assessed and the aforesaid components were treated as electronic components. Accordingly, trade tax was assessed at four per cent. Thereafter, the proceeding for reassessment was started on the ground that the parts manufactured and sold by the petitioner are liable to be assessed under the head "other electronic goods" and trade tax at eight per cent was liable to be assessed on it. Accordingly, the report was submitted by the assessing officer and in pursuance of the said report, the Additional Commissioner (respondent No. 2) issued a show-cause notice dated February 15, 2007 to the petitioner. In response to the aforesaid show-cause notice, the petitioner filed his reply dated February 27, 2007 in which he has stated that the parts manufactured by the petitioner are the components of loudspeaker which is an electronic goods, accordingly, the parts were assessed as electronic goods. Being the component of electronic goods, it is liable to be assessed in the head of "electronic goods" itself and not in the head of "other electronic goods". It has also been stated in the reply that for the year 2003-04, the parts manufactured by the petitioner were assessed in the head of "other electronic goods" against which, the petitioner filed Appeal No. 737 of 2006 before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) which was allowed by the judgment dated November 30, 2006 in which it has been held that the parts manufactured and sold by the petitioner are the components of electronic goods and liable to be assessed in the head of "electronic goods". Since the judgment of the appellate authority inter-parties has become final, accordingly, it is binding upon the assessing officer and no reassessment proceeding is required to be taken. However, respondent No. 2 by the impugned order dated March 9, 2007 rejected the objection of the petitioner and granted permission under section 21(2) of the Trade Tax Act for reassessment. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the notice was issued by the assessing officer (respondent No. 3) on March 14, 2007.
(3.) The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parts manufactured and sold by the petitioner were finally held by the appellate authority as the components of electrical goods coming in the head of "electronic goods". The judgment of the appellate authority inter se is binding and it is not proper for the assessing authority to overreach the judgment and restart the reassessment proceeding in respect of the same goods. Accordingly, the permission as granted under section 21(2) as well as reassessment proceeding are bad. The counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of this court in AAY Sons Elastomerics (India) v. State of U.P.,1995 29 ATJ 561; judgment of the Supreme Court in Municipal Corporation of City of Thane v. Vidyut Metallics Ltd., 2007 8 SCC 688 and Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., 1992 AIR(SC) 711;