JUDGMENT : M. MADHAVAN NAIR, J. 1. These O.Ps. against the Commissioner of the Ernakulam Municipality are for calling up to this High Court the orders of the respondent in assessment of profession tax on the petitioners to be quashed by writs of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution on the ground that they are ultra vires and illegal. The petitioners’ case is that they, being companies doing business within and without the area of this Municipality are assessable only under rule 18 [2] of the Taxation add Finance Rules, 1114, issued by the Government of Cochin on the turnover of their business in the Municipal area as has been ruled by the Travancore-Cochin High Court in Standard Vacuum Oil Company v. Commissioner, Ernakulam Municipal Council (AIR. 1955 TC. 121), but the Commissioner rejecting the returns submitted by the petitioners as to their respective turnovers assessed them under rule 19 [4] of the above said Rules on an arbitrary scale, the basis of which has not been disclosed to them. 2. O.P.Nos, 180/55, 56/56 and 136/56 are by the TataOil Mills Co. Ltd., Tatapuram, in respect of the assessment for the half-years ending with 31-3-1955, 31-9-1955 and 31-3-56 respectively. O.P. Nos. 206/55, 71/56 and 244/56 are by the Caltex [India] Ltd., Ernakulam, in regard to the assessments in respect of the above said periods. O.P. No. 140/56 is by the Standard Vacuum Oil Company, Ernakulam, in regard to the assessment for the half-year ending with 31-3-1956. 3. The procedure for assessment of profession tax on companies doing business within this Municipality is laid down in Rules 18 and 19 of the Taxation and Finance Rules, framed by the Government of Cochin on 3rd Makaram 1114, and published in the Rules and Notifications of Cochin, 1114, at page 149. They are as follows:- “18(1). Where a company or person transacts business in any half-year exclusively in the area of a single municipality, the income of such company or person from the transaction of such business shall, for the purpose of levying tax on professions and other sources of income under this Act during the half-year be deemed to be (a) ................. Where a company or person transacts business in any half-year exclusively in the area of a single municipality, the income of such company or person from the transaction of such business shall, for the purpose of levying tax on professions and other sources of income under this Act during the half-year be deemed to be (a) ................. (b) Where the amount of the said profits and gains is not ascertainable or where such company or person is not assessed to income tax such percentage as the Government may prescribe, of the turnover of the business transacted in the area of the Municipality during the half-year or where this is also unascertainable, during the corresponding half-year of the previous year. (2) Where a company or person transacts business partly in the area of a Municipality and partly outside such area the income of such company or person from the transaction of business in the area of the municipality shall, for the purpose of levying tax on professions and other sources of income under this Act, be deemed to be the percentage prescribed under Clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of the turnover of the business transacted in such area during the half-year or the corresponding half year of the previous year as the case may be. (3) For the purposes of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) and sub-rule (2) the turnover of business in any Municipality means the aggregate money value of the goods produced, manufactured, imported, exported, purchased or sold or of any another business transacted in such municipality. Explanation ............................. 19. ............................. (3) If no return is made as required under sub-rule (l) or if the executive authority is satisfied that any return so made is incorrect or incomplete the executive authority shall assign to the company or person the class in the scale appropriate to the half-yearly income of such company or person as estimated by him..............................” 4. Admittedly the petitioners-companies are doing business in the area of the Ernakulam Municipality and also outside this municipality in various places in India. It is also admitted that in response to the notice issued by the respondent they have all submitted returns showing their respective turnovers of business transacted in the area of the Ernakulam Municipality during the relevant half-years. It is not the complaint of the respondent that those returns were anyway incorrect or incomplete. It is also admitted that in response to the notice issued by the respondent they have all submitted returns showing their respective turnovers of business transacted in the area of the Ernakulam Municipality during the relevant half-years. It is not the complaint of the respondent that those returns were anyway incorrect or incomplete. He says in the impugned orders of assessment: “You have shown in the return the turn-over of business of the company during the corresponding half year of the previous year presumably with the plea that the assessment is to be made on the basis of this turnover. I am unable to accept this plea. This is therefore a case in which I have to fix the assessable income on general considerations in accordance with rule 19 (3) and (4) of the Taxation and Finance Rules. Accordingly the company is assessed for the half-year ending with 31-3-55 on a monthly income of Rs.42,000/-. A bill for the tax due Rs.3,300 is enclosed. You are requested to pay the tax at an early dale not being later than 15 days from the receipt of this.” (Excepting the variations in the figures, the orders of assessment in these cases read the same). The case of the respondent therefore is that these Companies are not entitled to claim assessment of profession tax on them to be made under the rule 18 (2). 5. It is noteworthy in this connection that the identical attitude of this respondent came up for consideration before the High Court of Travancore-Cochin in O. P. Nos. 140/1953 and 47 of 1954 at the instance of two of the petitioners herein, and it was ruled then by a Division Bench of the High Court: “The only basis of the assessment of the company to professional tax being the percentage of their turnover as prescribed by the Government the orders of assessment to professional tax based on the income estimated by the Commissioner cannot be supported. This being an error apparent on the face of the record and the orders made being speaking orders admit of judicial review and are liable to be quashed in ‘certiorari”. Standard Vacuum Oil Company v. Commissioner, Ernakulam Municipal Council (AIR. 1955 T-C. 121). We are in full agreement with the above dictum and bold that the same ought to have been followed by the respondent Commissioner in these cases. Standard Vacuum Oil Company v. Commissioner, Ernakulam Municipal Council (AIR. 1955 T-C. 121). We are in full agreement with the above dictum and bold that the same ought to have been followed by the respondent Commissioner in these cases. As per rule 18 (2), he had only to calculate the income of the company at such percentage as the Government had prescribed on the turnover of the business transacted in the area of the Municipality by each company during the relevant half-year and levy profession-tax on the basis of the income so determined. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent told us that the correctness of the above-said ruling of the Travancore-Cochin High Court is pending consideration by the Supreme Court in appeals preferred by the Municipality as per certificate issued by the High Court. It may be so; but, on hearing the learned counsel on both sides, we do not find our way to differ from the dictum laid by the Travancore-Cochin High Court in the case referred to above. As such, we are constrained to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order of assessment in each of these cases leaving the respondent-Commissioner free to assess the petitioners now under Rule 18 (2) of the said Taxation and Finance Rules, 1114, or later as the Supreme Court may indicate in their decision in the appeals mentioned above. 7. The Rules Nisi issued in these cases are therefore made absolute. The petitioners shall have their costs in these petitions. Allowed.