KOTVAL, J. - The petitioners Messrs Ramkrishna Ramnath, Bidi Merchants of Kamptee, carry on the business of manufacture and sale of bidis, with their head office at Kamptee and branch offices at several other places such as Tumsar, Gondia, Bhandara, Tiroda, Nagpur, Akola and other places in Vidarbha. The petitioners are registered dealers under section 8 of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (XXI of 1947), hereinafter referred to as the Act. As registered dealers, the petitioners were making quarterly returns under section 10 of the Act. For the period from 7th November, 1953, to 26th October, 1954, they had similarly made their returns. It is now not in dispute that these returns were not made upon the due dates under the Act but were delayed by some days. The respective dates on which the returns were due and were actually filed are shown in a tabular statement below :-

---------------------------------------------------------------------- Return for the Due date Date of actual period ending filing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3-2-1954 3-4-1954 20-4-1954

2-5-1954 2-7-1954 27-3-1955

29-7-1954 29-9-1954 31-12-1954

26-10-1954 26-12-1954 27-3-1955 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

On 11th November, 1957, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Eastern Division, Nagpur, issued a notice against the petitioners. The notice was in Form XII as prescribed by rule 32 of the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Rules, 1947. By this notice, the petitioners were called upon to show cause why they should not be assessed and/or why a penalty should not be imposed upon them. The notice, it is not disputed, was issued under section 10(3) read with section 11(4)(a) of the Act though several other sections are mentioned at the top of the form.

The petitioners took objection to the issue of this notice and one of the grounds which they raised was that the notice had been issued beyond the period of three years from the date of the assessment of the petitioners for the said period. Thereafter, the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner were stayed due to certain other proceedings pending in the High Court of Judicature at Nagpur and later on in the High Court of Bombay and because of the latter proceedings the objection could not be disposed of. On 7th June, 1958, however, the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Eastern Division, before whom the proceedings were pending, transferred the case to the Sales Tax Officer, Circle No. 2, Nagpur, respondent No. 1 before us. Thereafter, respondent No. 1 issued on 27th December, 1958, a fresh notice in Form XII under rule 32 of the Sales Tax Rules, against the petitioners. The petitioner is directed against the said notices dated 11th November, 1957, and 27th December, 1958, and the petitioners pray in the first instance that writs of prohibition or certiorari should be issued to quash the two notices referred to above. They also claim a writ of prohibition against the first respondent prohibiting him from continuing the assessment proceedings pursuant to the second notice.

The sheet-anchor of the special civil application is the decision of this Court in Bisesar House v. State of Bombay ([1958] 9 S.T.C. 654; 60 Bom. L.R. 1395). In that case, the petitioner had made a return for the years from 1st July, 1951, to 30th June, 1954, and had paid the tax in accordance with the return. On 31st December, 1956, notices were issued under section 11(2) of the Act and were served upon the petitioner in that case so far as the first year was concerned, on 4th January, 1957, and so far as the second year was concerned, on 8th January, 1957. It was contended that the Sales Tax Authorities had no jurisdiction to issue these not