https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162251 Absence of a separate mahazar did not vitiate the search and seizure where the shop inspection report recorded the inspection details, seized records and dealer's acknowledgment. Section 100(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires a list of seized articles, not a separate mahazar in every case, and a detailed inspection report can satisfy that requirement. The Court also held that materials obtained from the search remained usable in penalty proceedings, and the dealer failed to rebut the statutory burden under explanation I to section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, so the penalty was upheld. en-us Wed, 01 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:59:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162251 Absence of a separate mahazar did not vitiate the search and seizure where the shop inspection report recorded the inspection details, seized records and dealer's acknowledgment. Section 100(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires a list of seized articles, not a separate mahazar in every case, and a detailed inspection report can satisfy that requirement. The Court also held that materials obtained from the search remained usable in penalty proceedings, and the dealer failed to rebut the statutory burden under explanation I to section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, so the penalty was upheld. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 01 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162251