M/S SHIV STEELS versus THE STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 9 S.C.R. 1069 · Decided: 11-09-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.B. PARDIWALA, SANDEEP MEHTA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 9 S.C.R. 1069 : 2025 INSC 1126
M/s Shiv Steels 
v. 
The State of Assam & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 4440 of 2014)
11 September 2025
[J.B. Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose whether the High Court was right in holding that 
although the earlier assessments for the three years were held 
to be time-barred, yet, the revenue having obtained appropriate 
sanction from the Commissioner, the limitation thereafter would 
be governed by s.21 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993.
Headnotes†
Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 – ss.19, 21 – Time limit for 
completion of assessment and re-assessments – Assessment 
in certain cases – Earlier assessments for the three years 
held to be time-barred, yet, the revenue having obtained 
appropriate sanction from the Commissioner, the limitation 
thereafter would be governed by s.21, upheld by the High 
Court – Correctness:
Held: In construing fiscal statutes and in determining the liability of 
a subject to tax one must have regard to the strict letter of law – If, 
the case is not covered within the four corners of the provisions 
of the taxing statute, no tax can be imposed by inference or by 
analogy or by trying to probe into the intentions of the legislature 
and by considering what was the substance of the matter – On 
facts, assessments undertaken for the three years were already 
held to be invalid because of being time barred, in view of s.19 – 
Later, by virtue of obtaining sanction from the Commissioner, the 
revenue could not have taken recourse to s.21 to say that the 
reassessment within four years is permissible with prior sanction 
from the Commissioner – s.21 would apply only in cases where no 
assessment has been made under any of the provisions of the Act 
within the time limits specified in s.19 – Interpretation of the two 
provisions by the High Court completely incorrect, and the order 
passed by the High Court set aside. [Paras 12-14]
1070
[2025] 9 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
List of Acts
Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993.
List of Keywords
Time limit for completion of assessment and re-assessments; 
Assessment in certain cases; Assessment time-barred; Sanction 
from the Commissioner; Limitation; Construing fiscal statutes; 
Taxing statute; Imposition of tax by inference or by analogy.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 4440 of 2014
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.09.2012 of the Gauhati 
High Court in WP No. 3178 of 2011
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 4441 and 4442 of 2014
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Manish Goswami, Sr. Adv., Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Gaurav 
Shukla.
Advs. for the Respondents:
Chinmoy Pradip Sharma, Sr. A.A.G., Shuvodeep Roy, Irfan Hasieb, 
Vijay Deora, Aditya Agarwal.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Order
1.	
Since the issues raised in all the captioned appeals are same, the 
parties are also the same and the challenge is also to the self same 
judgment and order passed by the High Court, those were taken up 
for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common 
order.
2.	
For the sake of convenience, we take up the Civil Appeal No. 4440 
of 2014 as the lead matter.
3.	
This appeal arises from the common judgment and order passed 
by the Gauhati High Court dated 21.09.2012 in WP(C) No. 3178 of 
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 
1071
M/s Shiv Steels v. The State of Assam & Ors.
2011 by which the Writ Petition filed by the appellant herein came to 
be dismissed by which the Order of reassessment dated 31.3.2011 
passed under the provisions of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 
1993 (for short, “the Act, 1993”) was set aside and the matter was 
remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.
In the present case, we are concerned with the assessment years 
2003-2004, 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 respectively.
4.	
It is the case of the appellant that the assessments undertaken for 
all these years were time barred. The learned counsel appearing 
for the appellant would argue that the authority concerned having 
regard to the time limit prescribed under Section 19 of the Act, 1993 
declared the assessments for all the assessment years to be time 
barred. However, later the department obtained the sanction of the 
Commissioner and invoked Section 21 of the Act, 1993 to bring the 
fresh assessment within the period of limitation.
5.	
The petitioner being dissatisfied by the fresh assessment challenged 
the same before the High Court.
6.	
The High Court dismisse

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.