TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (11) TMI 452
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Advocate-General, Assam, appeared for the State. The petitioners are proprietorship concerns duly registered as dealers under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993. They are members of the Guwahati Tea Auction Centre and engaged in the business of purchase and sale of tea in course of inter-State trade and commerce. The disputes relate to the turnovers for the year 2001-02. The turnovers disclosed total sale of tea to the tune of Rs. 8,33,26,100 [in W.P. (C) No. 7044 of 2005]; Rs. 6,78,31,000 [in W.P. (C) No. 7045 of 1999]; Rs. 9,05,25,900 [in W.P. (C) No. 7046 of 2005] and Rs. 7,72,86,400 [in W.P. (C) No. 7047 of 2005]. The petitioners having sold the tea to the registered dealers of other States are not required to pay taxes unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s on August 26, 2005. The taxing authority assessed the tax payable summarily to the best of his judgment on the basis of the report of the Area Inspector of Taxes without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The copy of the report was also not furnished. Aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this court for setting aside the aforesaid notices of demand with prayer for stay, etc. The common question to be dealt with in all these writ petitions is whether the assessment orders passed by the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit B, Guwahati, for the year 2001-02 under section 17(5) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 read with section 9(2) of the CST Act, 1956 could be reviewed in exercise of discretionary powers of this ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....alt with the matter in a callous and negligent manner; and their conduct all through does not justify any lenient consideration. There is no dispute that the assessees being registered dealers in the State of Assam and having sold the tea to the registered dealers outside the State are not required to pay taxes as provided in section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, provided a declaration duly filled in and signed by the registered dealers to whom the goods have been sold is furnished to the taxing authority within the prescribed time or within such further time as the authority may, for sufficient cause, permit. In the instant case, it appears that the assessees submitted an application only on June 22, 2004 informing the Superinte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cted without jurisdiction and/or in complete violation of the principles of natural justice. I have duly considered the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the parties. Shri Roy, learned counsel for the petitioners, relied upon the following decisions in support of his contention: (i) Dwijendra Kumar Bhattacharjee v. Superintendent of Taxes, Government of Tripura [1990] 78 STC 393 (Gauhati); [1990] 1 GLJ 52; (ii) Electrical Cables and Conductors v. State of Tripura [1991] 81 STC 216 (Gauhati); [1990] 2 GLJ 23; (iii) Purbachal Development Corporation v. State of Tripura [2002] 128 STC 417 (Gauhati); [2002] 3 GLR 621; (iv) State of Kerala v. K.T. Shaduli Yusuff [1977] 39 STC 478 (SC); AIR 1997 SC 1627; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rix. It was a case where an application for adjournment filed by the assessee was not considered judicially. The ratio available in this decision is of no help to the petitioners. I have taken care of the other decisions referred to above. The decisions primarily deal with the question of violation of the principles of natural justice. The ratio available in these decisions cannot be applied in the cases at hand since the assessees here acted in utter disregard to the orders passed by the assessment authorities. There appears to be no violation of the principles of natural justice in the cases at hand. Rather, the assessees appear to have dealt with the matter in a casual manner in complete defiance to the requirements of law. No fault, ....