https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158461 Section 38-A(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 was upheld as a valid security requirement for tax proceedings, by analogy with an earlier deposit condition sustained under the sales tax law. However, the security demand and consequential cancellation of registration were without jurisdiction because the statutory precondition under section 16-A was absent: the dealer had filed the return in time, so the power to demand security could not be invoked. The Court also recognised that, in assessment proceedings, the assessee is entitled to relevant material, including inspection and supply of documents to be used against it, and to summoning of records necessary for a fair assessment. en-us Tue, 12 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:57:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158461 Section 38-A(2) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 was upheld as a valid security requirement for tax proceedings, by analogy with an earlier deposit condition sustained under the sales tax law. However, the security demand and consequential cancellation of registration were without jurisdiction because the statutory precondition under section 16-A was absent: the dealer had filed the return in time, so the power to demand security could not be invoked. The Court also recognised that, in assessment proceedings, the assessee is entitled to relevant material, including inspection and supply of documents to be used against it, and to summoning of records necessary for a fair assessment. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 12 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158461