ASHOK BHAN, J.

( 1 ) THE State of West Bengal and others, the appellants herein, have filed this appeal against the final judgment dated 13/02/2002 of the High Court of Calcutta in w. P. T. T. 32 of 2002, by which the High Court has dismissed the writ application of the appellants herein holding, inter alia, that sanction to retain the seized records was not in conformity with proviso (b) to Section 66 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 (for short 'the Act')

( 2 ) THE respondent is a re-seller of "neutrela" Soya beans food product, palm fatly acid distillate, acid oil and RBD Palmolein oil after importing the same from out side the State of west Bengal as well as by making purchases within the State of West Bengal.

( 3 ) ON 18th October, 2000, the files, books of accounts and documents kept at the place of the business of the respondent were seized pursuant to a search conducted by the officers attached with the Central Section of Commercial Tax Directorate. The books and documents were seized by the commercial Tax Officers for the reason that the respondent was evading payment of tax under the Act and the said books of accounts and documents as detailed in the seizure receipt are required for taking action under the provisions of the Act. In the report relating to the said seizure it was stated that the dealer was evading tax by floating dummy files and fabricating documents. According to the appellants since the seized books of accounts, registers and other documents, on the basis of which investigation was to be conducted, were of extensive nature, the assessment could not be completed within a period of one year as stipulated under Section 66 of the Act. The seizure in the instant case had taken place on 18th October, 2000. The period of one year was to expire on 17th october, 2001. Show cause notice dated 9th October, 2001 was sent to the respondent by speed post on 10th October, 2001 requiring its representative to appear before the Additional commissioner, Commercial Taxes on 12th October, 2001 to show cause as to why the seized records should not be retained for a further period of one year beyond 18th October, 2001. As no one on behalf of the respondent appeared on 12th October, 2001 and only a few days were left before the prescribed period of one year was to lapse, the Additional Commissioner vide its order dated 12th October, 2001 granted sanction for retention of the seized records till 18th October, 2002 to enable the investigating officer to complete the examination of the seized records and the said order was sent to the respondent by speed post. The said sanction as well as show cause notice were received by the respondent on 22nd October, 2001. 3

( 4 ) AGGRIEVED by the said order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Commercial taxes, the respondent filed an application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation tribunal Act, 1987 before the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal, Calcutta (for short 'the tribunal') being Revision Case No. RN 450/2001, seeking a direction to assessing officer to forthwith release the books of accounts, documents and records seized on 18th October, 2001 under Section 66 of the Act and to pass an order quashing and/ or setting aside the purported order dated 12th October, 2001 passed by the Additional Commissioner according sanction for retention of the seized books of accounts and records, till 18th October, 2002 under Section 66 (1) (b) of the Act on the ground that no opportunity whatsoever was given to the respondent before passing the said order.

( 5 ) THE Tribunal by its order dated 4th January, 2002 allowed the application of the respondent. Relying upon a decision in C. I. T. West Bengal-III and others Vs. Oriental rubber Works [1984 (1)SCC 700], the Tribunal held that the order of retention had become invalid as the same was not communicated to the applicant within the prescribed period of limitation and accordingly set aside the order dated 12th October, 2001 passed by Add