M. B. SHARMA, J. - (1.) A short question is involved in this writ petition and it is as to whether annexure 5 dated 18th February, 1988, which undisputedly contains the demand raised under annexures 1 and 2 dated 15th February, 1988 and 17th February, 1988, could have been issued under section 11-A of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1954 (for short, "the RST Act" ). The petitioner is a private limited company and manufactures cement at Hindaun City and has a mini cement plant. There is no dispute that the sales tax under the RST Act is payable on the sale of the cement manufactured by the petitioner-company. It appears that under the provisions of section 7-B of the RST Act provisional assessment under annexure 1 for the period from 9th April, 1986 to 30th September, 1987, was made and a demand of Rs. 8,070. 52 was raised and the petitioner was called upon under the provisions of sections 11-B and 11 (3) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act to deposit the aforesaid amount of Rs. 8,070. 52 within seven days. It was also intimated to the petitioner that in case of his failure to deposit the said amount within the aforesaid period proceedings under section 11-B of the RST Act will be initiated against him. Again a rectification order for the aforesaid period was made and under annexure 2 dated 17th February, 1988, the petitioner was called upon to pay Rs. 695. 21 within 15 days. For the period from 1st October, 1987 to 31st October, 1987 under section 7-B of the Act again provisional assessment was made and a demand was raised for Rs. 15,046. 52 against the petitioner and the petitioner was called upon to pay the amount forthwith. Lastly, a provisional assessment under the aforesaid provisions of section 7-B of the RST Act was made and a demand of Rs. 10,220. 15 was raised against the petitioner and the petitioner was called upon to pay the aforesaid amount forthwith. The notices dated 15th February, 1988, are said to have been received by the petitioner on 19th February, 1988. Under section 11-A of the RST Act annexure 5 dated 18th February, 1988, was issued to the Manager, State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Hindaun Branch, calling upon him to pay the amount which was lying in the accounts of the petitioner-company with the Bank. It is annexure 5 dated 18th February, 1988, which has been challenged by the petitioner before us.
(2.) THE challenge to the annexure 5 dated 18th February, 1988, is basically on the ground that the same could not have been issued on 18th February, 1988 more so when it contains the demand vide annexure 1 dated 15th February, 1988, and annexure 2 dated 17th February, 1988, under which the time to deposit the amount mentioned therein was 7 days and 15 days respectively. THErefore, so far as the demands raised are concerned, notice under section 11-A could have been issued after the expiry of 7 days (annexure 1) and 15 days (annexure 2) respectively. THE notice under section 11-A is dated 18th February, 1988, and therefore it was issued the next day of annexure 2 and the third day of annexure 1 and therefore it was issued before the expiry of 15 days and 7 days as stated earlier. It may be stated that now so far as the demands under annexures 1 and 2 are concerned they have been set aside by the appellate court and this position has not been disputed by Mr. Bapna, learned counsel for the non-petitioner. It has already been said earlier that according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, demands were raised in respect of provisional assessment made under section 7-B of the RST Act. Under sub-section (1) of section 7-B of the RST Act after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard in case the assessing authority has reason to believe that a dealer has evaded or avoided tax he may determine at any time and for any period the taxable turnover of such a dealer and assess the tax to the best of his judgment. Under sub-section (2) of section 7-B of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act subject to the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 7, the amount assessed under sub-section (1) shall be payable by the dealer forthwith and in default of payment shall be recoverable as arrears of land revenue. Therefore, there can be no dispute that the amount of tax determined under the provisional assessment to the best of the judgment of the assessing authority is payable by the dealer forthwith. Rule 31 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Rules, 1955 (for short "the Rules"), refers to notice for demand and under it as soon as the assessment has been completed under sections 7-A, 7-B, 10 or 12, the assessing authority shall serve a notice on the dealer in form S. T. 7 along with a certified copy of the assessment order requiring him to pay the tax so assessed witlain the time specified in the notice which shall not be less than fifteen days from the date of its service and in the manner specified in the notice and the dealer shall pay the tax accordingly. It will therefore be clear that generally a time of 15 days is given to the dealer to make the payment of the demand of tax assessed and only in exceptional cases where the assessing authority thinks that it is necessary to do so, it may call upon the dealer to pay the demand forthwith, or within the period shorter than 15 days and any such period will be reckoned from the date of service, annexures 3 and 4 are dated 15th February, 1988, and the service was effected on the dealer on 19th February, 1988, and therefore, there was no question of issue of annexure 5. It is in addition to the fact that the petitioner-company was called upon under annexures 1 and 2 to pay the amount mentioned therein within 7 days and 15 days respectively and so far as the demands are concerned, no notice under section 11-A, annexure 5, could have been issued on 18th February, 1988. A bare reading of section 11-A of the RST Act will show that the question of invoking the powers under that section will only arise in case the dealer has failed to pay the due tax, penalty or demand made by the assessing authority. We have to read section 11-A alongwith rule 31. It has already been said that annexure 5 is composite notice, and under annexure 1 dated 15th February, 1988, seven days time to deposit the amount was given and under annexure 2 dated 17th February, 1988, 15 days time was given for that purpose. Annexure 5 could not have been issued before the expiry of the aforesaid 7 days and 15 days time as aforesaid. It is not possible to sever a notice for demand raised under annexures 1, 2, 3 and 4 and therefore it cannot be said that the notice annexure 5 relates to annexures 3 and 4 only. We are of the opinion that annexure 5 was not issued in accordance with the provisions of section 11-A of the RST Act and the Rules. Consequently, we allow the writ petition and hereby quash annexure 5 dated 18th February, 1988, but we direct the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur Branch, Hindaun City, to hold the money for two weeks so that the assessing authority may take action in accordance with the rules. Costs made easy. Writ petition allowed. .;