https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128997 Section 41 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was read as conferring inspection powers, not a general power of search, and the proviso could not enlarge the main provision. The confiscation and seizure machinery under section 41(4) and the second proviso exceeded the State's ancillary power under Entry 54 of List II because it went beyond tax collection and introduced a confiscatory levy unrelated to a taxable sale or purchase. The scheme also lacked adequate safeguards and was therefore not a reasonable restriction on property and business rights under Articles 19(1)(f) and 19(1)(g). The search warrant and confiscation orders were accordingly quashed. en-us Thu, 25 Feb 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Apr 2013 11:02:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128997 Section 41 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was read as conferring inspection powers, not a general power of search, and the proviso could not enlarge the main provision. The confiscation and seizure machinery under section 41(4) and the second proviso exceeded the State's ancillary power under Entry 54 of List II because it went beyond tax collection and introduced a confiscatory levy unrelated to a taxable sale or purchase. The scheme also lacked adequate safeguards and was therefore not a reasonable restriction on property and business rights under Articles 19(1)(f) and 19(1)(g). The search warrant and confiscation orders were accordingly quashed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 25 Feb 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128997