Statutory recovery for sales tax arrears upheld where power of attorney holder acted for the defaulting concern.

A recovery notice for sales tax arrears was upheld because the petitioner had acted as power of attorney holder for the proprietrix and had participated in reassessment and settlement proceedings on behalf of the defaulter concern. On those facts, the business was treated as being carried on for and on behalf of the defaulting concern, making statutory recovery under the sales tax law permissible. The separate grievance over debit from the petitioner's bank account was not examined in the petition, and the refund claim was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the recovery notice issued under Section 14 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 for arrears due from the dealer was valid and whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of the amount debited from his bank account.

Analysis: The petitioner had executed and acted under a general power of attorney on behalf of the proprietrix, and the materials showed that he had participated in the reassessment and settlement process in that capacity. On those facts, the Court held that the business was being carried on for and on behalf of the defaulter concern, and the Assessing Authority was justified in invoking recovery powers for arrears of sales tax. The Court also noted that the grievance about deduction from the petitioner's bank account was not the subject matter of the petition.

Conclusion: The recovery action was upheld and the claim for refund was rejected, in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed, and the impugned recovery was sustained as a lawful exercise of statutory powers for arrears collection.

Ratio Decidendi: A person acting as power of attorney holder for a defaulter concern and participating in proceedings on its behalf can be proceeded against through statutory recovery mechanisms for arrears due from that concern, where the recovery is otherwise within the authority conferred by the sales tax law.

---