(1.) This writ application has been filed challenging the legality of the notice dated 2nd April 1997 issued by the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit-B, Panbazar, Guwahati directing the petitioner to show cause as to why steps for prosecution under Section 60 and p61 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 should not be taken for committing the offence of not disclosing the value of the works contract of processing and supplying of photographs, photo prints and photo negatives etc. in Part G of the annual return for the assessment year 1995-96 and for not depositing the tax as due under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993. Further, the assessment order dated 29.4.97 passed by the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit-B, Panbazar for the assessment year 1995-96 levying tax on the works contract of processing and supplying of photographs, photo print and photo negatives is also challenged. Further the validity of the notice dated 20th May, 1997 directing the petitioner to make payment of the demanded dues for the assessment year 1995-96 in three equal instalments is also has been challenged.
(2.) In order to appreciate the first controversy, paragraph 3 of the writ application is quoted below :
(3.) The question which arises for determination is whether the job rendered by photographers in taking photographs, developing and printing works would mean to a works contract as contemplated under Article 366(29A)(a) and (b) of the Constitution read with the definition of sale under Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993. The definition of sale as is available under Section 2 (33) of the Assam Act is quoted below :-