Liberal construction of sufficient cause justifies condonation of inordinate delay where criminal proceedings and jail confinement explained the defau...
Section 2(28C) defining "Joint Commissioner" to include the Additional Commissioner governed the approval requirement for penalty proceedings, and a harmonious reading of the Act showed no indication in section 274(2) that the inclusive definition was excluded. Provisions that separately mentioned both officers were treated as clarificatory rather than restrictive, and reading the term otherwise would make the statutory definition ineffective. Prior approval by the Additional Commissioner was therefore valid compliance with the approval requirement, and the challenge to the penalty proceedings on want of proper sanction failed. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty preserved to pursue statutory remedies on the merits.
Section 2(28C) defining "Joint Commissioner" to include the Additional Commissioner governed the approval requirement for penalty proceedings, and a harmonious reading of the Act showed no indication in section 274(2) that the inclusive definition was excluded. Provisions that separately mentioned both officers were treated as clarificatory rather than restrictive, and reading the term otherwise would make the statutory definition ineffective. Prior approval by the Additional Commissioner was therefore valid compliance with the approval requirement, and the challenge to the penalty proceedings on want of proper sanction failed. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty preserved to pursue statutory remedies on the merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
