Escaped turnover reassessment: timely initiation can survive later delay, and writ relief may be refused on discretionary grounds.

Rule 6(7) of the Central Sales Tax (Kerala) Rules was treated as fixing only the time-limit for initiating escaped-turnover proceedings, not for their completion. Where the initial notice was issued within that period, later delay in completing reassessment did not by itself invalidate the proceedings. The Court also considered the petitioner's conduct, including requests for time to produce records and the delayed raising of the objection, as relevant to discretionary relief under article 226. On that basis, interference with the pending reassessment was declined and the challenge based on delay was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the reassessment proceedings for escaped turnover under rule 6(7) of the Central Sales Tax (Kerala) Rules could be entertained on the ground of inordinate delay and whether interference under article 226 was warranted at the stage when the assessment had only been set in motion.

Analysis: Rule 6(7) fixed a time-limit for initiation of proceedings to assess escaped turnover, but did not prescribe any further period for their completion. The Court distinguished authorities arising under provisions where no limitation was prescribed at all, and under section 35 of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 where the statute itself dealt with both commencement and completion. Since the initial notice had been issued within time, delay in the subsequent steps did not by itself render the proceedings illegal. The petitioner's own conduct, including seeking time to produce records and raising the objection only later, also weighed against grant of discretionary relief under article 226.

Conclusion: The challenge on the ground of delay was rejected and the Court declined to interfere with the pending reassessment proceedings.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was held not fit for interference at that stage and was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing provision fixes only the period for initiation of escaped-assessment proceedings and the notice is issued within that period, subsequent delay in completing the proceedings does not automatically vitiate them; interference in writ jurisdiction depends on the overall reasonableness of the case and the petitioner's conduct.

---