Registered dealer status defeats unregistered-shop allegations where the inspection record rests on conjecture, not reliable evidence.

Proceedings under Section 28 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 could not be sustained where the dealer held a valid registration certificate and TIN for the very shop inspected. The record, including the District Magistrate's report, showed that the premises at Station Road, Khagaria were in fact Shiv Shiva Readymade Dresses, so the assumption that the petitioner was running an unregistered shop rested on conjecture rather than reliable evidence. A discrepancy in the vakalatnama or inspection record was insufficient to treat a registered dealer as unregistered or to justify Section 28 action. The impugned orders were therefore quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether proceedings under Section 28 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 could be sustained when the dealer had a registration certificate and TIN in the name of the very shop found at the inspected premises, and the impugned orders were based on an alleged mismatch in the shop name and other conjectural assumptions.

Analysis: The record showed that the shop at Station Road, Khagaria was in fact Shiv Shiva Readymade Dresses, and this was corroborated by the District Magistrate's report. The petitioner also possessed a registration certificate and allotted TIN under the Bihar Value Added Tax Act in the same shop name. In that situation, the finding that the petitioner was running an unregistered shop and could be proceeded against under Section 28 rested on conjectures and surmises rather than on any reliable factual basis. The discrepancy created by the vakalatnama or the inspection record could not justify treating a registered dealer as an unregistered one, nor could it support the initiation of proceedings under Section 28 on the facts found.

Conclusion: Proceedings under Section 28 were not sustainable against the petitioner, and the impugned orders were liable to be quashed in favour of the assessee.

---