- (1.) By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, M/s Allahabad Paper House, seeks the following reliefs: 1. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned notice dated 22.3.93 issued by the respondent No. 2 under Section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (Annexure No. 7 to the writ petition); 2. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to proceed further reassessment proceedings against the petitioner for the assessment year 1984-85 under the Central Sales Tax in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 22.3.93 issued by the respondent No. 2; 3. issue such other and further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case; and 4. award costs of the petitioner to the petitioner.
(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows: According to the petitioner, it was a registered firm duly registered under the provisions of the U.P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The Registration was valid from the assessment years 1976-77 upto 1980-81. Its books of account had been accepted upto the assessment year 1980-81. On 30.4.1981, the petitioner surrendered its registration certificate to the Sales Tax Officer, Sector VII, District Allahabad, respondent No. 2, who was the Assessing Authority. The proceedings for the assessment year 1984-85, both under the Act and the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Central Act"), were initiated by the respondent No. 2. The petitioner submitted its detailed reply. The respondent No. 2, vide order dated 3.2.1989, passed separate assessment orders holding that it had carried the business, both under the Act and the Central Act. In the U.P. proceeding, the respondent No. 2 had determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 2,50,000/- and determined the tax liability at Rs. 20,000/- whereas under the Central Act, the turnover was fixed at Rs. 10,00,000/- and the liability of tax at Rs. 1,00,000/-. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred separate appeals before the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial), Sales Tax, U.P., Allahabad who, vide order dated 11.7.1989, remanded the matter back to the Assessing Authority for fresh consideration. Still feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred further appeal before the Sales Tax Tribunal, Allahabad which, vide order dated 2.5.1990, directed the Assessing Authority to pass a fresh assessment order under the Act in the light of the directions contained in its order. The appeal preferred against the assessment made under the Central Act, was decided by the Tribunal later on 11.5.1992. Pursuant to the order dated 2.5.1990, the respondent No. 2, vide order dated 17.10.1990, declared the petitioner non-taxable in respect of the U.P. proceeding. According to the petitioner, the Tribunal in its order dated 11.5.1992 has held that the information relating to M/s Bhagwan Das Shobhalal Jain, Chameli Chowk, Sagar (M.P.) did not pertain to the year 1984-85 and, therefore, the question of drawing an adverse inference against the petitioner did not arise. Subsequently, the respondent No. 2 had issued a notice on 22.3.1993 under Section 21 of the Act calling upon the petitioner to produce its books of account and other documents. The said notice had been issued on the ground that information has been received from M/s Bhagwan Das Shobhalal Jain, Chameli Chowk, Sagar (M.P.) that the petitioner had sold paper worth Rs. 5,07,362.50P. during the assessment year 1984-85 to that firm. The notice dated 22.3.1993 is under challenge in the present writ petition on the ground that initiation of reassessment proceeding on the same turnover which was already considered in the original assessment without any fresh material on record, is illegal and unjustified and the petitioner had already been assessed earlier under the Central Act on the alleged ground that the petitioner had sold paper to the said firm of Sagar and it had been declared non-taxable by the Tribunal. There was no fresh material for initiating the proceedings under Section 21 of the Act and it is based on a mere change of opinion.
(3.) In the counter affidavit filed by S.R. Bajpai, Assistant Commissioner, Trade Tax, Sector VII, Allahabad on behalf of the respondent No. 2, in paragraph 3(d) it has been stated that subsequent to the assessment order dated 3.2.1989 for the assessment year 1984-85 under the Central Act, the answering respondent received information for sale of paper worth Rs. 5,07,363.50P. by the petitioner to one M/s Bhagwan Das Shobhalal Jain, Chameli Chowk, Sagar (M.P.) and on this basis the notice under Section 21 of the Act was issued on 22.3.1993. The said information had not been considered in the original assessment proceedings. The proceedings initiated under Section 21 of the Act have been justified.;