Casual trader tax levy fails where goods and cash were held for a registered dealer without proper enquiry.

Tax liability could not be imposed on a person carrying old silver articles and cash on behalf of a registered dealer where the contemporaneous statement, the order book in the dealer's name, and the absence of evidence that the goods were new or that the cash was sale proceeds supported the petitioners' explanation. The authority failed to establish any legal basis for treating the first petitioner as a seller or casual trader, and the on-the-spot levy was made without proper enquiry or fair opportunity. The notice, tax collection, and penalty recovery were treated as coercive, rendering the action illegal and without jurisdiction, with refund of the amounts collected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent lawfully detained the first petitioner, treated him as a casual trader, and collected tax and penalty from him by coercion.

Analysis: The first petitioner was found carrying old silver articles and cash on behalf of the second petitioner, a registered dealer. The contemporaneous statement recorded from the first petitioner, the order book standing in the name of the second petitioner, and the absence of any material to show that the articles were new goods or that the cash represented sale proceeds were accepted as supporting the petitioners' version. The respondent did not establish any legal basis for taxing the first petitioner as a seller or casual trader, and the on-the-spot levy was found to have been made without proper enquiry and without fair opportunity. The manner in which notice was issued and tax and penalty were recovered was held to indicate coercion.

Conclusion: The action of the respondent was illegal, without jurisdiction, and liable to be set aside; the tax and penalty collected were directed to be refunded to the petitioner.

---