Court orders swift decision by tax department, emphasizing fair hearing and statutory timelines.

Bhagirath Bishnoi Versus State of Rajasthan and others - [2009] 24 VST 161 (Raj) Issues:
Challenge to multiple notices under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and proceedings initiated against the petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged various notices issued under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003, alleging that the respondent failed to finalize the matter within the stipulated period, causing financial loss. The petitioner contended that all required documents were submitted but respondent No. 3 wrongfully assumed forgery, leading to the continued detention of the vehicle. The petitioner cited Supreme Court judgments emphasizing the need for rationality in assessing authorities' actions.

The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the respondent was unnecessarily harassing the petitioner by not releasing the vehicle promptly as mandated by the Act. The petitioner sought the release of the vehicle and goods, highlighting compliance with statutory requirements. In response, the respondents contended that the proceedings were ongoing, and the petitioner's approach to the court was premature as the matter was yet to be decided based on the documents provided.

The court noted that the respondent had presumed illegality without a final decision, emphasizing the need for authorities to act in accordance with the law. Citing relevant judgments, the court directed the respondent-Department to decide the matter within one week, disregarding the forgery allegations and providing the petitioner with a fair hearing. The court emphasized the importance of rational decision-making by authorities and disposed of the writ petition without costs.

In conclusion, the court's decision focused on ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to statutory timelines in the proceedings initiated under the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The judgment underscored the significance of rationality and lawful conduct by authorities while addressing challenges to notices and actions taken against the petitioner.