Extended retention of seized records is valid where recorded reasons and written approval are obtained; prior hearing is not implied.

Section 66 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 required the officer to record reasons in writing and, where applicable, obtain the Commissioner's written sanction before retaining seized books and records beyond one year. The statute did not require prior communication of those reasons or sanction to the assessee before the original retention period expired, and it did not imply a mandatory pre-expiry hearing in the absence of express provision. The extended retention was therefore valid once the statutory conditions were satisfied, and the challenge to the sanction failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, under section 66 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994, retention of seized books and records beyond one year required prior communication of the sanction and reasons to the assessee and an opportunity of hearing before the expiry of the retention period.

Analysis: The relevant provisos to section 66 required the officer to record reasons in writing and, where applicable, obtain written sanction of the Commissioner before continuing retention beyond one year. The statute did not require that the reasons or sanction be communicated to the assessee before the expiry of the original period. The earlier decision construing section 132(8) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was relied upon only for the proposition that communication of approval and reasons is necessary to make the decision effective, not for any rule that such communication must occur before the expiry of the statutory period or that a prior hearing is mandatory in the absence of a similar provision in the Act.

Conclusion: Prior communication of the sanction and reasons before expiry of the one-year period was not a statutory requirement, and the retention order was not invalid on that ground. The challenge to the sanction failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute requires recorded reasons and written approval for extended retention of seized documents, the extension is valid if those statutory conditions are met, and a prior hearing or communication before expiry is not implied unless the statute expressly so provides.

---