Date of assessment is relevant for deciding rights of the parties.

In W.P.No.5391 of 2001, the petitioner had challenged the order of the second respondent made in proceedings No. RC.1396/AAC/2000 dated 27.2.2001 and for a consequential direction to the second respondent to admit the appeal filed by the petitioner on 14.9.2000 challenging the assessment order dated 21.8.2000 passed by the second respondent demanding payment of 25% of the difference of tax as assessed and the tax as admitted and dispose of the appeal on merits.

2. In W.P.Nos.4355 and 4356 of 2001, the petitioners pray for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to admit the appeal preferred by the petitioners on 14.9.2000 and 25.8.2000 respectively challenging the assessment order dated 4.8.2000 and 18.8.2000 respectively of the third respondent without demanding payment of 25% of the difference of the tax as assessed and the tax as admitted and dispose of the appeal on merits.

3. Since the issue involved in all the three writ petitioners are one and the same, all the three writ petitions are taken up for hearing and disposed of by this common order.

4. In all the three writ petitions, the issue involved is as to the applicability of Amended Act No.4 of 2000 to the petitioners is under the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967. There is no dispute that the said Act came into force on 1.6.2000. By the said Act in Sec.34 of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967, the following words were added to their second proviso “and 25% of the difference of tax assessed by the assessing authority and the tax admitted by the appellant”. Prior to the said amendment, the petitioners were entitled to prefer an appeal without deposit of 25% of the difference of tax assessed by the assessing authority as a pre-condition for filing appeal. After the amendment, in order to prefer an appeal, the petitioners, shall deposit 25% of the difference of tax as assessed by the authority. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners in all the three writ petitions, the returns became due for the assessment year 1996-97 when the erstwhile Rule 60 of the Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967 was in force and on the date of notice, gist of judgment along with the proposal was served on the petitioners by the assessing authority and were prior to the above amendment, which came into force on 1.6.2000. Therefore, the petitioners cannot be insisted to deposit of 25% of the difference of tax assessed by the assessing authority for the purpose of entertaining the appeal. In support of the said submission, the learned counsel would reply upon an order made in Special Tribunal in Hugs Advertising Industries and others v. Commercial Tax Officer, Vadapalani Assessment Circle, Chennai, and others 119 S.T.C. 591. In the said judgment, the Special Tribunal while considering the relevant date on which a right vested in an assessee has to say thus:

“23. We also give considerable weight to the Full Bench Judgment in Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu (1989)74 S.T.C. 303. They have diluted the emphasis on “lis” and therefore the emphasis on commencement of proceedings in tax laws, become important. In this connection, we can also refer to Rules 7 to 18 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. They prescribed the dates when dealers are obliged to file returns, under various circumstances. Even if a nil return is filed and accepted, there is no guarantee that it will not be re-opened. Any assessment order can also be revised. It is not proper to leave the discretion to the authorities, as to when they call for accounts or when they issue a pre-assessment notice or a revision notice. It is wiser and safer to adopt a firm date as the date on which the vested right of appeals vests on the assessee. We, therefore hold that the date of filing a return or the date on which the return is due as per the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and Rules, whichever is earlier, as the date on which right of