- (1.) THIS order will dispose of L. P. A. Nos. 3 to 10 of 1977 as all of them arise out of one order whereby eight writ petitions were dismissed.
(2.) IT is sufficient to refer to the facts in L. P. A. No. 3 of 1977 arising out of Writ Petition No. 1530 of 19761. The appellant, M/s. True Lines (India) Industries, was assessed to sales tax by the Assessing Authority, Ludhiana, by order dated 29th January, 1973. On 22nd January, 1976, the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Ludhiana, issued a notice purported to be under Section 21 (1) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the (1) [1977] 39 S. T. C. 258. Act), informing the appellant that he had called for the record of the proceedings of the assessment order dated 29th January, 1973, for the purpose of satisfying himself as to the legality and propriety of the proceedings and that he proposed to give an opportunity to the appellant of being heard from all aspects of the matter. At the bottom of the notice, it was stated as follows : Remarks.-The sales of Rs. 1,02,056. 48 and Rs. 1,06,807. 50 taxed at the rate of 1 per cent and 3 per cent respectively under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, shown to M/s. Shambhu Lal Nanji and Co. , Bombay, were denied and seven other firms.
(3.) THE appellant questioned the validity of the abovesaid notice by a writ petition on the ground that the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner was not in fact trying to revise the order of assessment of the Assessing Authority, but was trying to reopen the assessment on the basis of fresh information received by him subsequent to the order of assessment. It was, therefore, urged that he was not competent to do so as the power to reopen the assessment on the basis of fresh information was vested under Section 11-A of the Act in the Assessing Authority and not in the revising authority. It was further submitted that the revising authority acting under Section 21 (1) of the Act had to confine himself to the record of the proceedings on which the Assessing Authority based the order of assessment and not on any such information that came into its possession subsequently. In support of this contention reliance was placed on a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Hari Chand Rattan Chand and Co. v. Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner [1969] 24 S. T. C. 258 (F. B. ).;