High Court directs respondent to provide seized document copies, petitioner to file objections within 2 weeks. Orders to be passed within 6 weeks.

The High Court set aside the respondent's order dated 31.07.2015 and directed the respondent to provide xerox copies of the seized documents within two weeks for the petitioner to file objections. The petitioner was given two weeks to submit necessary objections, followed by the respondent passing orders within six weeks based on merit and law, after providing an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, without costs, effectively resolving the issues raised by the petitioner.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order of respondent issued in TIN No. 33592123679/2009-10 dated 31.07.2015 and direction to furnish copies of records recovered through Form VSI-5 dated 29.03.2010.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges the respondent's order dated 31.07.2015 regarding the shifting of the petitioner's business premises and the recovery of records during an inspection on 29.03.2010. The petitioner, a registered dealer in Gutka and Sodium Benzoate, shifted their business location twice, notifying the respondent each time. The enforcement authorities found discrepancies during the inspection, leading to a tax payment by the petitioner. Despite requests for copies of the seized documents, the respondent issued a pre-revision notice in 2014, followed by the impugned order in 2015 without considering the documents submitted by the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the order was passed without proper explanation or opportunity to respond, highlighting procedural irregularities and non-compliance with document requests.

Analysis:
The petitioner's contention includes the failure of the respondent to provide copies of the recovered records for filing objections, as requested by the petitioner. The respondent's actions, such as issuing a notice proposing tax and penalty after four years of the inspection, not considering the documents submitted by the petitioner, and passing the impugned order without affording an opportunity to respond, were challenged as unjust. The petitioner's request for setting aside the impugned order was based on the respondent's failure to return the seized documents, consider the objections filed, and provide copies of the submitted documents for review. The court noted the inadvertent failure of the respondent to consider the petitioner's documents, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and a direction to furnish xerox copies of the seized documents within two weeks for filing necessary objections and subsequent orders based on merit and law.

Analysis:
The High Court, after considering the arguments presented, set aside the impugned order dated 31.07.2015 and directed the respondent to provide xerox copies of the seized documents within two weeks for the petitioner to file objections. The petitioner was instructed to submit necessary objections within two weeks of receiving the copies, followed by the respondent passing orders based on merit and law within six weeks, after providing an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, without any costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed, resolving the issues raised by the petitioner effectively.

---