Reassessment notices served beyond the statutory limitation period are invalid, and authority must strictly adhere to procedural mandates specified in the law.

JUDGMENT :

MURAHARI SRI RAMAN, J.

Propriety, legal sanctity, authority and jurisdiction in framing assessment under Section 10 of the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999 (for brevity, "OET Act") vide Order dated 12.07.2024 in Form E-7 (Rule 16 of the Odisha Entry Tax Rules, 1999, for short "OET Rules") by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax and Goods and Services Tax Circle, Paradeep (Annexure-9) for the tax periods from 01.04.2005 to 28.02.2006 in connection with Notice dated 08.09.2023 in Form E-32 [Rule 15D(1) of the OET Rules] vide Annexure-8 being questioned by way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner craves for grant of following relief(s) showing indulgence of this Court by exercise of power under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India:

"That in view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ(s):

(i) Quashing the assessment order and demand notice dated 12.07.2024 in Annexure-9 (Series) as being illegal and devoid of merit and bereft of correct procedure.

(ii) Quashing the Notice dated 08.09.2023 in Annexure-8 as being without application of mind and settled law.

(iii) Quashing the Revision Order dated 21.08.2023 (issued on 23.08.2023) in Revision Case No.JSP- 21/E/2023-24 in Annexure 7 as being passed without proper application of mind.

(iv) Quashing the communication dated 31.03.2023 in Annexure-4 as being afterthought and without application of mind.

(v) Quashing the notice dated 24.04.2023 in Form E-32 at Annexure 6 as being illegal.

And pass such other order(s) as trite in the interest of law and justice;

For which acts of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound, shall ever pray."

Case of the petitioner:

2. The profile of the petitioner and the narration of factual matrix as adumbrated in the writ petition, so far as relevant for the purpose of adjudication of issue raised are given hereunder.

2.1. The petitioner, a limited company registered under the Company Act, 1956, having its manufacturing unit located at Paradeep, is engaged in the manufacturing of different types of chemical fertilizers including DAP, MOP, MPK and effects sale of its end products both inside and outside the State of Odisha.

2.2. For the tax periods from 01.04.2005 to 28.02.2006, it filed its self-assessment [Meaning of the term “self-assessment” can be construed by referring to clause (q) of Section 2 of the OET Act— “Words and Expressions used herein and not defined in this Act, but defined in the VAT Act shall have the meaning respectively assigned to them in that Act”— read with clause (47) of Section 2 of the Odisha Value Added Tax Act, 2004 defining the term “self-assessment” to mean “a true and correct determination of net tax liability by a dealer in relation to any tax period”.]  returns as required under Section 9 of the OET Act read with Rule 15 of the OET Rules. Though no communication was made with respect to acceptance of such self-assessment returns, pursuant to submission of a report bearing No.96 dated 29.03.2006 prepared by the Sales Tax Officer, Intelligence Range, Cuttack, proceeding for Audit Assessment under Section 9C was initiated by service of a Notice in Form E-30 as required under Rule 15B of the OET Rules construing said "Intelligence Report" as if it were an "Audit Visit Report" submitted under Section 9B of the OET Act read with Rule 11 of the OET Rules. The petitioner participated in the said Audit Assessment proceeding. Upon consideration of objections contained in such report t