LexSUPDT. OF TAXES, DHUBRI & ORS versus ONKARMAL NATHMAL TRUST ETC. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
i ·· ~ 365 SUPDT. OF TAXES, DHUBRI & ORS. A v. ONKARMAL NATHMAL TRUST ETC. ETC. May 1, 1975 [A. N. Rt\Y, C.J., H. R. KHANNA. K. K. MATHEW, M. H. BEG ANDY. V. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.] Assam Taxation (on goods carried by Road or Inland Waterways) Act, 1961, sub-ss. (1) and (2) of s. 7, sub-s. (4) of s. 9 and s. 11-Notice on assessee to be served within two years for filing return-Court ordering stay of proceedings under tire Act-Notice of demand for return after expiry of two years period-Notice under s. 7(2), if iflegal. Consequent upon the declaration of the invalidity of the Assam Taxation lon goods carried by Road or on Jnland Waterways) Act, 1954, by the Sup- reme Court in Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. The State of Assam and Ors. [19611 1 S.C.R. 806, on the ground that prior sanction of the Presidend was not taken, the ·Assam Legislature passed on April 6, 1961, the Assam Taxation (on goods carried by. Road or on Inland Waterways) Act, 1961. This Act was to remain in force with retrospective effect from 24 April, 1954, upto 1 March, 1962. The respondents challenged the validity of the Ac~ before the High Court of Assam in writ petitions and they applied for injunction restraining the appellants from taking any proceedings under the Act. Interim orders of injunction were passed on various dates. The appel- lant~ opposed the interim orders of injunction. A common order was passed by the Court on 18-9-1961 making the orders absolute and res- training the appel!ants from taking any proceedings under the Act. The order staying proceedings continued till the new Act was held ultra vires the Constitution by the High Court. On August l, 1963, he High Court held the new Act to be ultra vires. On the same day the High Court granted certificate of fitness to appeal to this Court. On December 13, 1963, this Court in Khyeberi Tea Co. Ltd. & Anr v. The State uf Assam, [1964] 5 S .. C.R. 975, held the Act of 1961 to be valid. On the strength of the certificate granted by the High Court, the State of Assrrm filed an appeal in this Court on March 4, 1964. On October 28, 1964, this Court granted interim stay ofl the operation of the judgment of the High Court. On January 29, 1965, the interim stay granted by this Court was made absolute. On April 1, 1968, this Court accepted the appeals filed by the State. the first sub-section of section 7 requires every producer and dealer to fumish returns of manufactured tea carried in tea containers and jute CaJ:ried B c D E F in bales in such forms and to such authority as may be prescribed. The second sub-section states that in case of any producer or dealer who, in .the opinion G of the Commissioner, is liable to pay tax for any return period· or a part thereof, the Commissioner may serve within two years of the expiry of the aforesaid period, a notice in the prescribed form requiring him to furnish a return of goods carried and such producer or dealer shall thereupon furnish the return within the date and to the authority mentioned in the notice. Sub- se;:;!ion (Z) of section 9 states that if the Commissioner is not satisfied that a return furnished under section 7 is correct and complete, be shaH serve on the producer or dealer a notice requiring him, on the date and hour and place H mentioned therein, either to attend in person or to produce or cause to be pro- duced any evidence on which he may rely in support of his return. Sub-section (4) states that if a producer or dealer fails to make a return as required by section 7 or having made the return, fails to comply with the terms of the notice issued under sub-section (2) of s. 9, the Commiss.ioner shall, by an order in writ- JOg', assess to the best of his judgment the producer or dealer and determine~ zax payable by him on the basis of such assessment. It is provided that before making assessment the commissioner may allow the producer or dealer such ;}- . r - 366 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1975] SUPP· S.C.~. A further ti~e .as he thinks fit to make the return or to comply with the terms of he nohce Issued under sub-section (2) of section 9. B c It _is only after thei Sta!e obtained interim order from this CoUit that notices were Issued by the Supenntendent o~ Taxes to the respondents for ffii.nc the returns for the quarters mentioned in the writ petitions. The respondents-ttl>"· sessees ~hallenged _these demand notices in the
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.