R B HARDUTT MULL JUTE MILLS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 414 of 1953, the assessee has a jute mill at Katihar in the district of Purnea where he carries on business in jute and jute products and cotton cloth. The assessee has also got a jute purchasing centre at Forbesganj in the same district where he carries on business of purchasing and selling jute as well as textiles. For the period 1st of April, 1948, to 31st of March, 1949, the assessee did not produce any return showing the gross turnover. A notice under Section 13, Sub-section (4), of the Bihar Sales Tax Act was served upon the assessee, calling upon him to produce his accounts for the period in question. More than a dozen adjournments were granted but. the assessee failed to produce the account books. Thereupon the Sales Tax Officer proceeded to make an assessment under Section 13(4) of the statute to the best of his judgment. The order of the Sales Tax Officer is dated the 22nd of January, 1950. The Sales Tax Officer determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 1,02,31,200 and the sales tax was computed at Rs. 1,91,835. The assessee took the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Sales Tax, but the appeal was dismissed. The assessee then moved the Board of Revenue and filed an application in revision, but this application was also dismissed by the Board of Revenue. At the instance of the assessee the Board of Revenue has stated the following question of law for the opinion of the High Court under Section 25(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Act :- Is it legal or permissible for a Sales Tax Officer to base his estimate on the report of an Inspector of the Department, without giving a copy of the same, when asked for, to the assessee, or without giving any information about the material particulars of the report and without hearing the assessee on the same ?

(2.) In Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 415 of 1953 the material facts are of similar character. The assessment for the period 1st of July, 1947, to 31st of March, 1948, and the date of the assessment order of the Sales Tax Officer is the 23rd of November, 1949. The Sales Tax Officer determined the taxable turnover at Rs. 74,97,000 and the sales tax payable at Rs. 1,17,140-10-0. In this case also the assessee took the matter in appeal to the Commissioner of Bhagalpur, but the appeal was dismissed. The assessee preferred an application to the Board of Revenue in revision, but that application also was dismissed by the Board of Revenue. At the instance of the assessee the Board of Revenue has stated a case for the opinion of the High Court on the following question of law :- Is it legal or permissible for a Sales Tax Officer to base his estimate on the report of an Inspector of the Department, without giving a copy of the same, when asked for, to the assessee, or without giving any information about the material particulars of the report and without hearing the assessee on the same ?

(3.) After having heard counsel for the parties we consider that the questions referred to by the Board of Revenue in these cases have not been properly framed. In our opinion, the questions should be referred in the following manner so as to bring out the real controversy between the parties :- Whether in the circumstances of the case the assessment of sales tax upon the assessee is legally vitiated because the Sales Tax Officer did not show to the assessee the report of the Inspector or because the Sales Tax Officer did not disclose to the assessee the material particulars of the Inspector's report before making assessment for the period in question ?