Judgment

KHANNA, J.:- Whether notice issued under Section 12 (8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (Act 14 of 1947) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) should be quashed on the ground that it does not mention the reasons for the issue of the notice is the main question which arises for determination in these two appeals, Nos. 1190 and 1191 of 1969, which have been filed by special leave against the common judgment of the Orissa High Court allowing writ petitions filed by the respondents against the appellants.

2. For sake of convenience we may give the facts giving rise to appeal No. 1190 of 1969 as it is the common case of the parties that the decision in that appeal would govern the other appeal also. The respondent in appeal No. 1190 is a dealer registered under the Act. The matter relates to the assessment for 1963-64. The date of the order of assessment is not on file but it is stated that it was made sometime in the later part of 1964. On March 30, 1967 the Sales Tax Officer, Intelligence Wing, Vigilance, Berhampur made a search of the business premises of the respondent and seized several account books. On the following day further search was made and some additional account books were taken into possession. Later on that day, viz., March 31, 1967 the Sales Tax Officer issued the following notice under Section 12 (8) of the Act to the respondent:

"Notice to a dealer under Section 12 (8) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act.

(See Rules 22, 23 and 28 (2))

To

M/s. Utteswar Rice Mills (Dealer) At/P. O. Berhampur, GAI 2127-A

(Address)

............................

............................

*Whereas I have reason to believe that your turnover for the quarter ending 1963-64 on which Sales Tax was payable under the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 has escaped assessment/has been under-assessed.

You are hereby required to submit within one calendar month from the date of receipt of this notice a return in Form IV (enclosed) showing the particulars of your turnover for the year ending 1963-64.

*You are also hereby required to attend in person or by agent at my office at Berhampur on 11-5-67 at 11 A. M. and thereto produce or cause to be produced the accounts and documents specified on the reverse and also to show cause why in addition to the amount of tax that may be assessed on you a penalty not exceeding one and a half time that amount should not be imposed on you under sub-sec. (5) of S. 12 of the Act.

In the event of your failure to comply with all the terms of this notice I shall proceed to assess you under Section 12 of the Act to the best of my judgment without further reference to you.

Sd/- Illegible

Signature

Sales Tax Officer

Intelligence Wing, Vigilance

Berhampur.

Place - Berhampur. "

Date - 31-3-67.

The notice was received by an employee of the respondent. Appearance was thereafter put in on behalf of the respondent before the Sales Tax Officer and a copy of the old return which had been earlier filed in accordance with Section 11 of the Act was again filed before the Sales Tax Officer. According to the respondent, appearance was put in on its behalf on several occasions with a view to know the reason for the issue of the above notice, but the respondent was not informed of that reason. It is further stated that the Sales Tax Officer recorded the statements of a number of witnesses behind the back of the respondent with the intention of making reassessment under Section 12 of the Act. Request was made on behalf of the respondent to the Sales Tax Officer for being furnished with copies of those statements so that the respondent might be in a position to know the reason for the issue of the notice. Copies of those statements were, however, not supplied and the application filed by the respondent for obtaining copies of the statements was rejected by the Sales Tax Officer. It was mentioned by the Sales Tax Officer that the question of grant of copies of the statements would be considered if the statements were used against the respondent. The responden