Reasoned suspicion required for seizure of accounts; bare statutory recital cannot sustain tax evasion seizure.

Seizure of books of account and documents under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was invalid where the officer failed to record the reasons that formed the basis of suspicion of tax evasion. The statutory power to seize registers, records or other documents depended on a written and reasoned suspicion, not a bare recital of the provision or a reference to preliminary scrutiny. As the impugned order disclosed no independent reasons establishing that jurisdictional requirement, the seizure could not be sustained and was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seizure of books of account and documents under section 28(3) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was valid when the order did not record the reasons on the basis of which the officer entertained suspicion of tax evasion.

Analysis: Section 28(3) authorised seizure of registers, records or other documents only where the officer suspected an attempt to evade tax, and such suspicion had to rest on reasons recorded in writing. The impugned order merely stated the statutory language and referred to a preliminary scrutiny, but it did not disclose any independent reasons supporting the suspicion. Since the jurisdictional requirement of recording reasons was absent, the seizure could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The seizure order was illegal and liable to be quashed.

---