Reassessment requires a valid prior assessment; late returns prevented self-assessment, so escaped-turnover reassessment failed.

Under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, reassessment under Section 40 requires a valid prior assessment in law, and returns filed beyond the prescribed time do not complete self-assessment under Section 35. Because the dealer's monthly and annual returns, including revised returns, were filed late and the opposition did not dispute those dates, no lawful self-assessment could be deemed to exist. As a result, Section 40 could not be used to reassess escaped turnover, and the reassessment was also held time-barred under Section 39. The reassessment proceedings and demand were therefore quashed for want of jurisdiction and limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment under Section 40 of the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was valid when the returns and revised returns for the relevant year were not filed within the prescribed time so that no self-assessment could be deemed to have been completed under Section 35; and whether the reassessment order was barred by limitation and without jurisdiction.

Analysis: Section 29 of the Act and Rule 17 of the Assam Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 required monthly and annual returns to be filed within the prescribed period. The returns and revised returns for the assessment year in question were filed beyond the prescribed time, and the pleadings asserting those dates were not denied in the opposition, attracting the principle of deemed admission. On that basis, no valid self-assessment could be treated as completed under Section 35. Section 40 permits reassessment of escaped turnover only after a dealer has first been assessed under Sections 34, 35, 36 or 37, so the existence of a prior assessment in law was a condition precedent to reassessment. In the absence of such assessment, the reassessment proceedings could not be sustained. The court also held that the assessment period had become time-barred under Section 39.

Conclusion: The reassessment under Section 40 was invalid, barred by limitation, and without jurisdiction.

Final Conclusion: The impugned reassessment and demand were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment for escaped turnover can be invoked only after a valid prior assessment exists in law, and where the dealer's returns were not filed within the prescribed time so that self-assessment was not duly completed, Section 40 cannot be used to create jurisdiction for reassessment.

---