M.M. Kumar, J. - The instant petition has been filed under article 226 of the Constitution with the prayer for quashing order dated March 31, 2005 (P9) passed by the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner-cum-Assessing Authority, Hoshiarpur in respect of assessment year 2000-01. The principal ground of challenge is that the impugned order has been passed beyond the period of limitation prescribed under section 11(3) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for brevity, "the Act").

Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a sugar manufacturing unit and is registered under the provisions of the Act. The petitioner - dealer filed returns of tax under the Act claiming sale of sugar as tax-free. On the purchase of sugarcane no tax was paid as the dealer was claiming that on purchase of sugarcane no tax is leviable under the Act. Under section 11(3) of the Act, the assessment of the dealer can be framed within three years from the last day prescribed for filing of the returns. In the instant case the last date for filing of return in respect of the assessment year 2000-01 was April 30, 2001 and therefore the assessment was required to be framed on or before April 30, 2004.

In the case of the petitioner the Assessing Authority, Hoshiarpur was the appropriate authority under section 2(a) of the Act to frame the assessment but the case of the petitioner was transferred by respondent No. 3 to the file of Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner (Inspector), Punjab, Patiala. Thereafter the case was transferred to the file of the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Kapurthala. It is alleged that no copy of the order transferring the case from Patiala to Kapurthala was ever supplied to the petitioner. The Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Kapurthala issued notice on September 1, 2003 (P3). The case was then again transferred to Hoshiarpur. The petitioner appeared before the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner and questioned the authority of the Department to frame its assessment for the year 2000-01 on the ground that the matter has already become time-barred. However, the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Hoshiarpur vide order dated March 31, 2005 framed assessment levying tax on the purchases of sugarcane at eight per cent. raising a demand of Rs. 1,92,97,175. On the issue of limitation, the Assessing Authority observed that vide order dated April 16, 2004, the Excise and Taxation Commissioner in exercise of powers under section 11(10) of the Act has already granted extension to frame assessment up to March 31, 2005. The case of the petitioner is that no extension order was ever passed till date. In any case no such order has ever been communicated to the assessee so far.

The petitioner has challenged the notice on the ground that the Assessing Authority was required to finalise the assessment within a period of three years from the last date prescribed for furnishing the last return in respect of any period. Therefore, the period prescribed for finalising the assessment has come to an end on April 30, 2004 and the assessment in this case has become time-barred which has now been framed on March 31, 2005 (P9).

The stand of the respondents in the written statement is that although assessment under section 11(3) in respect of the dealer is required to be completed within three years from the last date of filing of the return but by virtue of the provisions of sub-section (10) of section 11 of the Act, which was added with effect from April 20, 1998, the Commissioner is empowered to extend the period of three years for passing an order of assessment for such further period as he may deem fit. It is also observed in para 5 of the written statement that the Excise and Taxation Commissioner had transferred the assessment cases of the petitioner for various assessment years including the assessment years 1999-2000 and 2000-01 in exercise of powers under rule 39C of the Punjab General Sales Tax