The assessing officer's basis for reassessment must have a rational connection with the formation of the belief that the turnover had escaped assessment, and the reassessment must be in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules.

Amitava Roy, J.

1. The common grievance in this batch of writ-petitions relates to reassessment of tax under Section 18(1) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on account of claimed escapement of turnover of the petitioner at the time of initial assessment for the assessment year 1994-95, The statutory appeals having failed, the petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court. The petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment and order.

2. I have heard Dr. B.P. Todi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the Revenue.

3. The introductory facts in brief, pleaded by the petitioners would be necessary as a prelude.

4. The petitioners are the wholesale dealers registered under the Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 carrying on business of potato, onion, garlic, etc., on consignment basis with their principal place of business at TR Phukan Road, Fancy Bazar, Guwahati. They are liable to pay tax on the consignment sales of onion under the Act and duly submitted their return of turnover of sales for the assessment year 1994-95. The assessing authority on verification of their books of accounts and other relevant records in support of the particulars furnished by them in their return and being satisfied therewith completed the assessment under Section 17(4) of the Act vide assessment orders dated July 10, 1995, September 12, 1995, September 14, 1995 and August 22, 1995, respectively.

5. While the matter rested at that, the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit-B revised the original orders of assessment under Section 18 of the Act on the basis of a report submitted by the Accountant-General (Audit) alleging that the sale price of onion as shown in the assessment order was lower than the prevailing market price. The report was based on a survey conducted by the Deputy Director of Agriculture and/or Chambers of Commerce and was not on any independent enquiry supported by corroborative evidence. Eventually, the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit-B, respondent No. 4, revised the original assessments rejecting petitioners' contention to the contrary vide re-assessment orders dated December 18, 1996 and December 9, 1996. Being aggrieved by the orders of revised assessment, the petitioners preferred separate appeals before the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals), Guwahati, respondent No, 3, which were dismissed by order dated July 19, 2000. Their appeals before the Assam Board of Revenue under Section 5A of the Act also met the same fate, the Board having rejected those by its common judgment and order dated February 19, 2002.

6. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners that the sale price of onion is fixed by the transacting parties depending on the quality, size, moisture/water content as well as the demand and supply position of the market. Besides it being an agricultural product, perishable in nature, its sale price is not static, but is constantly fluctuating. The contention is that the petitioners being engaged in selling onion on consignment basis, they earn only the commission, and the sale price is fixed with the consent of the consignors, i.e., suppliers. As the retail price of the commodity is always higher than the sale price, the retail price cannot be taken as the basis of the average wholesale price. According to the petitioners, the rates of sale price circulated or published by the Deputy Director of Agriculture (Marketing) and the Chambers of Commerce are presumably based on survey of rates or wholesale price rates gathered by way of general information and are without reference to the actual transactions of sale effected by the dealers. Further, the report of the Accountant-General (Audit) was on the basis of the survey report of two internal agencies without any supporting evidence and could not have been acted upon to determine the sale price of onion. According to them, there w