MATHUR, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Sundeep Bhandawat, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
(2.) THIS writ petition is directed against the orders of the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal Bench at Jodhpur dated 22. 1. 97 and 22. 7. 98. The respondent alongwith his two brothers took on lease a piece of land in Jodhpur from the Urban Improvement Trust for a period of ninety nine years on 15. 2. 83. A licence was issued in their joint name. They raised three constructions on the plot as their separate independent units. The Assistant Director made the assessment considering the property of H. U. F. The respondent preferred an appeal against the said order to the Director, Land & Buildings Tax but it was dismissed as withdrawn. Thereafter on 5. 10. 1991, the Director, Land & Buildings Tax issued a letter to the Assistant Director, which reads as follows: " The case was discussed with the Assistant Director. The same shows that it was purchased jointly by Shri Suresh, Satish and Madho Das Daga. There is no sub Division of the building by the Urban Improvement Trust as per the record. Since it was not purchased as Hindu Undivided Family property the family settlement does not hold good. Assistant Director advised to review the matter and take appropriate action u/s. 15b of the Land & Building Tax Act. " The Assistant Director issued a notice dated 24. 10. 91 to the respondent in purported exercise of powers under Sec. 15b of the Rajasthan Land & Buildings Tax Act, 1964. hereinafter referred-to as `the Act'. The said notification was challenged by way of writ petition before this court. On establishment of the Tribunal, it stood transferred to the Rajasthan Taxation Tribunal, Jaipur. The Tribunal held that there was nothing on record to indicate that the Assessing Authority himself had any reason to believe that the disputed land has been wrongly or incorrectly assessed. The court also held that the Director had no authority to issue directions under Sec. 22b interfering with the power of the Assessing Authority by issue directions as contained in the order dated 5. 10. 91. Accordingly, the petition was allowed and the directions of the Director dt. 5. 10. 91 and the notice dt. 24. 10. 91 were quashed by order dated 22. 1. 1997. The State preferred a review application before the Tribunal, which has been rejected by the order dated 22. 7. 98. It is contended by Mr. Sundeep Bhandawat that the Director under Sec. 22b being the Head of the Institution has the unfettered power to issue appropriate directions to subordinate Assessing Authority, which includes the directions even in an individual case. In order to appreciate the contention, it would be appropriate to read the provisions of Sections 15b and 22b, which read as under: " 15b. Land and Building Tax escaping assessment.-If the Assessing Authority has reason to believe, that for any reason any land or building has escaped assessment or has been wrongly or incorrectly assessed, he may, within such period and after following such procedure as may be prescribed, proceed to assess or re-assess such land or building and the provisions of this Act shall, as far as may be, apply to such assessment or re-assessment. (i) Reason to believe-The belief must not be whimsical but must be not only rational but legal. An arbitrary action is not justified. (ii) Procedure for.-The rule 15 lays down the procedure for the purpose. The notice in form LBT 10 shall be served upon the assessee. No notice shall be served for the purpose after the expiry of eight years from the date of assessment in question. 22b. Taxing authorities to follow orders etc. of the Director.-All officers and other persons employed in execution of this Act shall observe and follow the orders, instructions and directions of the Director: Provided that no orders, instructions or directions shall be given by the Director so as to interfere with the direction of the Appellate Authority in exercise of his appellate functions. A plain reading of Section 15b shows that once an assessment has been made, it can be re-opened only when the Assessing Authority has reason to believe that any land or building has escaped assessment or has been wrongly or incorrectly assessed. Thus, such a power is to be exercised by the Assessing Authority on its own satisfaction. Thus, the satisfaction for invoking powers under Sec. 15b is of none else but the Assessing Authority himself. A belief for escaping assessment or wrongful assessment is required to be based on reasons. Section 22b casts a duty on all officers and other persons employed in execution of the Act of 1964 to observe and follow the orders, instructions and directions of the Director. An Assessing Authority while assessing the tax liability under the taxing Statute is not bound by the departmental instructions or opinion of superior executive authority. Thus, it is only the instructions in the nature of general guidance issued by the Director not in a particular case which can be followed by the Assessing Authority. Any instructions by a superior officer can not fetter the discretion of the Assessing Authority. In the instant case, the Director, Land & Building Tax, has acceded the jurisdiction in advising the Assessing Authority in an individual case to initiate proceedings under Sec. 15b of the Act. It was improper on the part of the Assessing Authority viz. ; the Assistant Director to abdicate his power of re-assessment vested in him by Sec. 15b, just on the advice of the Director. As the impugned notice has been issued by the Assessing Authority without his own satisfaction with respect to the correct assessment, the notice has been rightly rendered illegal by the Tribunal. We find no infirmity in the order of the Tribunal.
(3.) CONSEQUENTLY, the writ petition is rejected in limine. .;