Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010007302023 2025:GAU-AS:3934 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/281/2023 M/S SANJIV SUN MOTOR AND ANR A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BENGENEKHOWA P.O. P.S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM (REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI SANJIV GOGOI I.E. THE PETITIONER NO.2.). 2: SANJIV GOGOI S/O. MUKUL GOGOI R/O. RANGAJAN DHULIA GAON P.O. P.S. AND DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE (TAXATION) DEPT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 2:THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM (KAR BHAWAN) G.S. ROAD DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXES (APPEALS) Page No.# 2/4 JORHAT. 4:THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF TAXES DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM. 5:THE SUPDT. OF TAXES DIST. GOLAGHAT ASSAM. ------------ Advocate for : MR. R S MISHRA Advocate for : SC FINANCE AND TAXATION appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 02.04.2025 1. Heard Mr. R.S. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, representing the state respondents. 2. The petitioner claims to be an assessee having registration under the Assam value Added Tax, Act 2003 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and have been discharging their liability for payment of VAT, CST. 3. They are aggrieved by a reassessment order dated 23.03.2021, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Tax, Guwahati and accordingly, the petitioners preferred an appeal. However, by the impugned order dated 10.03.2022, the appeal was rejected as time barred. 4. It is the case of the petitioners that while rejecting the appeal, the appellate authority failed to consider the order dated Page No.# 3/4 23.09.2021 passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Misc App No.665/2021 in SMW(C) No.3/2020 (in Re Cognizance for Extension Of Limitation). 5. Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the hon’ble Apex court in its order dated 23.09.2021, due to the Covid 19 pandemic situation, had granted certain relaxation and declared certain period to be excluded for counting the period of limitation as prescribed under the statute. However, factual assertion, as to whether, the case of the petitioners comes within the aforesaid period, is better to be left with the appellate authority. 6. This court is also of the opinion that whether the case of the petitioners and the period of limitation for which the petitioners’ appeal was dismissed, is required to be determined by the appellate authority itself in terms of the determination made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as recorded hereinabove. 7. In view of the aforesaid, this court is of the opinion that the matter should be relegated to the respondent No.3 by setting aside the impugned order dated 10.03.2022 and further asking the respondent No.3 to take note of the grievances raised by the petitioners as regards applicability of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ordered accordingly. 8. The petitioners’ shall file an application along with the order of this court and the determination made in the order dated 23.09.2021, before the respondent No.3 within a period of two weeks from today. 9. On such application being filed, the respondent No.3 shall consider the claim of the petitioners taking note of the relevant Page No.# 4/4 materials. 10. Accordingly the present writ petition stands allowed with the aforesaid observations. JUDGE Comparing Assistant