Quasi-judicial tax assessment must remain independent; superior guidance becomes fatal when it creates a reasonable apprehension of bias.

Administrative guidance under the Orissa Sales Tax Act may validly assist assessment functions, but a sales tax assessment remains a quasi-judicial exercise requiring the assessing officer's independent judgment. Where a superior authority goes beyond general guidance and participates in a manner suggesting a predetermined enhancement or rejection of accounts, the process may create a reasonable apprehension of bias and lack of apparent fairness. The assessment is therefore vulnerable to interference on grounds of arbitrariness and want of impartiality when independence of decision-making is undermined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment made under section 12(4) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act was vitiated because the assessing officer acted under the influence of the pre-assessment scrutiny report and administrative guidance of the superior sales tax authority, thereby justifying interference under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The power conferred on the Commissioner under section 3-A of the Orissa Sales Tax Act permits administrative circulars and guidance for the efficient discharge of assessment functions, and such guidance by itself is not objectionable. However, a sales tax assessment remains a quasi-judicial function, and a subordinate assessing authority must exercise its own independent judgment. A superior officer may not actively participate in the assessment process in a manner that suggests a specific enhancement or rejection of accounts, because such participation creates a legitimate apprehension that the assessment was not impartial. Even if the assessment officer may not in fact have been influenced, the surrounding circumstances may still undermine confidence in the fairness of the proceeding and render the assessment vulnerable on the ground of arbitrariness and want of apparent fairness.

Conclusion: The assessment was held to be liable to interference, and the writ petitioner succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Administrative guidance to a quasi-judicial assessing authority is permissible, but the assessment is invalid where the superior authority's participation goes beyond guidance and creates a reasonable apprehension that the assessing authority did not act independently and fairly.

---