Security demand must rest on objective statutory grounds; invalid notice quashed, with consequential declaration forms and permits granted.

Security demands under section 7(4a)(i) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 had to rest on objective grounds within the limits of the statute, and the recorded reasons here were found unsupported by the provision invoked. On that basis, the show-cause notice and security demand were held invalid and quashed. Consequential relief followed: the petitioner was entitled to the declaration forms and permits sought. However, the request for return of the seized books of account was refused, leaving the respondents free to act in accordance with law if manipulation was found.

---

---

Issues: Whether the demand for security and the notice issued under section 7(4a)(i) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 were valid in law, and whether the petitioner was entitled to consequential supply of declaration forms and permits.

Analysis: The authority's power to act under the statute had to be exercised on objective grounds and within the limits of the Act. The reasons recorded for demanding security were not supported by the statutory provision invoked, and no sufficient legal basis was shown for the show-cause notice or the security demand. As the impugned action could not be sustained, the consequential claim for declaration forms and permits followed from the setting aside of the security demand. The prayer for return of seized books of account was refused, leaving the respondents free to proceed in accordance with law if manipulation was found.

Conclusion: The demand for security and the connected notice were held invalid and were quashed, while the petitioner was held entitled to the declaration forms and permits sought.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of striking down the security demand and securing consequential administrative relief, but the request for return of the seized books of account was declined.

---