<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (4) TMI 782 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311374</link>
    <description>A special tax-enforcement bureau under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 was held to be confined to investigating tax evasion and connected malpractices, and it could not investigate distinct Indian Penal Code offences disclosed in the FIR. Those IPC offences had to be handled by the regular police under the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the bureau officers were not treated as superior police officers for that purpose. The document also states that cognizance of Sales Tax Act offences required prior sanction of the Commissioner; because no valid sanction covered the petitioners, the chargesheet, cognizance order and arrest warrant could not stand, although the FIR itself was not quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2023 14:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=736330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 782 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311374</link>
      <description>A special tax-enforcement bureau under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 was held to be confined to investigating tax evasion and connected malpractices, and it could not investigate distinct Indian Penal Code offences disclosed in the FIR. Those IPC offences had to be handled by the regular police under the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the bureau officers were not treated as superior police officers for that purpose. The document also states that cognizance of Sales Tax Act offences required prior sanction of the Commissioner; because no valid sanction covered the petitioners, the chargesheet, cognizance order and arrest warrant could not stand, although the FIR itself was not quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311374</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>