https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168948 The court ruled in favor of the respondent, a registered dealer whose registration was suspended due to an FIR alleging business operations from an unregistered address. The court held that the FIR exceeded the jurisdiction of tax officers and emphasized that the State cannot impede the respondent's right to livelihood solely based on an FIR. While not prohibiting tax officers from lodging FIRs, the court clarified that FIRs should only be filed for cognizable offenses and not for non-cognizable offenses under the VAT Act. The judgment underscored the importance of protecting the dealer's right to conduct business without undue interference. en-us Thu, 04 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Apr 2015 20:00:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168948 The court ruled in favor of the respondent, a registered dealer whose registration was suspended due to an FIR alleging business operations from an unregistered address. The court held that the FIR exceeded the jurisdiction of tax officers and emphasized that the State cannot impede the respondent's right to livelihood solely based on an FIR. While not prohibiting tax officers from lodging FIRs, the court clarified that FIRs should only be filed for cognizable offenses and not for non-cognizable offenses under the VAT Act. The judgment underscored the importance of protecting the dealer's right to conduct business without undue interference. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 04 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168948