Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Interpretation of 'required for a prosecution' allows retention of documents pending prosecution decision.</h1> The court in this case interpreted that the phrase 'required for a prosecution' allows for the retention of documents if the decision to prosecute is made ... - Issues Involved:1. Interpretation of 'required for a prosecution' under Section 28(3)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.2. Legality of retaining seized books beyond 30 days without initiating prosecution.3. The procedural propriety of seizure and retention of documents by tax authorities.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Interpretation of 'required for a prosecution' under Section 28(3)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963:The primary issue in this case revolves around the interpretation of the phrase 'required for a prosecution' in Section 28(3)(a) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963. The petitioner argued that if prosecution is not instituted within 30 days from the date of seizure, the books must be returned. The petitioner relied on the decision in Mubarak Stores v. Intelligence Officer, Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, Cannanore [1974] 33 S.T.C. 526; 1974 K.L.T. 327., which held that the term 'required for a prosecution' means required for an existing prosecution and not for one that may be filed beyond 30 days.In contrast, a different view was taken in Nazarudin v. Intelligence Officer, Agricultural Income-tax and Sales Tax, Quilon (O.P. No. 384 of 1971), where it was held that retention of books beyond 30 days is permissible if the decision to prosecute is made within that period, even if the prosecution itself is not initiated within 30 days.The court in the present case sided with the latter interpretation, stating that the words 'required for a prosecution' involve the concept of a decision being reached within 30 days that the documents are necessary for a prosecution to be lodged. However, it does not require that the prosecution itself must commence within 30 days. The court emphasized that the prosecution must be lodged within a reasonable time thereafter to avoid abuse of power.2. Legality of retaining seized books beyond 30 days without initiating prosecution:The court examined whether the retention of books beyond 30 days without initiating prosecution was lawful. The petitioner argued that such retention violated the statutory provision and fundamental rights. The court noted that Section 28(3) and Rule 34(2) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Rules, 1963, make it clear that retention of books and documents can only be for 30 days unless they are required for a prosecution.The court found that the decision to prosecute was reached within 30 days in the present case, and a show cause notice was issued soon thereafter. Therefore, there was no scope for directing the return of the books. The court dismissed the original petition but noted that the prosecution must be lodged within a reasonable time to avoid abuse of power.3. The procedural propriety of seizure and retention of documents by tax authorities:The court also addressed the procedural propriety of the seizure and retention of documents by tax authorities. The petitioner contended that the seizure was made without sufficient reason to suspect tax evasion and without following the prescribed procedure. The court emphasized that seizure must be in accordance with Section 28(3) and Rule 34(2), and any irregular seizure could be successfully challenged.The court highlighted the importance of good faith in retaining books beyond 30 days and noted that the tax authorities must provide sufficient materials to justify such retention. In cases where prosecution is delayed for an inordinate period, the court will not hesitate to interfere and direct the return of the books.In conclusion, the court upheld the interpretation that the phrase 'required for a prosecution' allows for retention of documents if the decision to prosecute is made within 30 days, even if the prosecution itself is not initiated within that period. However, the prosecution must be lodged within a reasonable time to prevent abuse of power. The court dismissed the petition but did not impose any costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found