H.N.SETH,J. - (1.) THIS petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in directed against the order of the STO, Moradabad, dt. 26th March, 1974, passed under S. 22 of the U.P. ST Act, rectifying the assessment year dt. 27th March, 1971.
(2.) THE petitioner Company carries on the business as coal agent and is registered under the U.P. and the Central ST Acts, with the STO at Moradabad. It used to make arrangement for the supply of coal from collieries situated in the States of West Bengal and Bihar, to dealers and consumers in the State of U.P. The collieries sent the coal by rail and the railway receipts used to be prepared either in the name of the petitioner or in the name of the consumers residing in U.P. on whose behalf of the order for supply of coal was placed. However, for receiving payment the collieris forwarded the bills and invoices in respect of all such coal despatched to the State of U.P. to petitioner's Head Officer at Calcutta. The railway receipts in respect all such consignments were in whose names they had been prepared or endorsed the receipt prepared in its favour to such consumers for whom coal had been despatched. Thereafter the consumer took delivery of coal from the railways in U.P. For the asst. yr. 1966-67 the petitioner filed quarterly returns dividing its turnover of coal into two categories : (1) The turnover of coal in cases where the railway receipts were prepared in the name of the consumers themselves...................Rs. 30,07,439.02p. (2) Turnover of coal in cases where the railway receipts were prepared in the name of the petitioner but he subsequently endorsed the same in favour of the consumers in the Sate of U.P...............Rs. 5,59,172.38.p. The petitioner claimed that the turnover of Rs. 5,59,172.38 could not be taxed in the Sate of U.P. The STO, relying upon the observation made by the High Court in petitioner's own assessment case for the year 1965-66, accepted its case that its turnover amounting to Rs. 5,59,172.38 could not be taxed in U.P. Subsequently, in a number of cases this Court rules that in a case where a dealer, effecting second sale in the course of inter-State trade goods is to be realised in the State where the dealer effecting the sale is registered. In one of such cases viz., in the case of Singhal & Co. vs. State & Ors. (1973) UP Tax Cases 466) this Court distinguished its judgment in petitioner's own case for the asst. yr. 1965-66 by observing that the decision therein was rendered in the absence of a finding that the petitioner was a registered dealer. As admittedly the petitioner was a registered dealer, the STO though that, there was an apparent error in the assessment order passed by him on 27th March, 1971 and that the order required rectification. Accordingly, on 21st March 1974, he issued a notice to the petitioner requiring it to appear before him on 25th March, 1974. On that date the petitioner appeared before the STO and contended that in the circumstances the assessment order dt. 27th March, 1971 could not be rectified. The STO rejected the objection and on 26th March, 1974 passed an order rectifying the assessment order and served a copy of the same on the petitioner on 31st March, 1974.
(3.) SEC . 22 of the U.P. ST Act provides that the assessing, appellate or revising authority may at any time within three years from the date of any order passed by him rectify any mistake apparent on the face of the record of appeal, revision, assessment or revision, as the case may be. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in this case, after hearing the parties concerned the STO by his order dt. 27th March, 1971 held that petitioner's turnover of coal amounting to Rs.;