TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1970 (12) TMI 66
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Factory, outside Chatiwind Gate, Amritsar, and the certificate of registration was changed from S.T. III to S.T. IV and the certificate issued bore No. AMR-IV-11753. On the coming into force of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the petitioner was also registered under that Act with No. AMR-CST-3391. In October, 1964, the Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer, Amritsar, issued a notice to the petitioner stating: "It has come to my notice that you are not carrying on business at the premises mentioned in the registration certificate granted to you. Presumably you are having no business premises. You are required to appear before the undersigned on 30th October, 1964, at 10 A.M. sharp and to show cause as to why your registration certificat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Authority, Amritsar, issued a notice to the petitioner-firm to show cause why its registration certificate should not be cancelled. This notice was presented to Shri Anant Ram Kapur, father of Shri Laxmi Narain, who has styled himself as the proprietor of the petitioner-firm, but was refused by him on 5th January, 1968. He also refused to sign the notice in token of its receipt. When the notice was returned unserved to the Assessing Authority, he issued another notice by registered A/D. post on 11th January, 1968, which was received back on 18th January, 1968, with the report of the postal authorities that the addressee had refused to accept the same. The Assessing Authority then issued another notice on 19th January, 1968, and directed i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y, 1968, cancelling the registration certificate No. AMRIV-11753, on the sole ground that"enquiries got made through the inspectorate staff and from other sources disclosed that the dealer has closed the business premises and it is not actually making purchases of goods, but exclusively charging a small remuneration for the use of its registration certificate. In the transactions now conducted by the dealer the very element of sale and purchase is missing inasmuch as there is no agreement to sell movable goods for any price consideration and the property in goods does not pass in pursuance of the agreement." It was concluded that the dealer had misused the registration certificate which needed cancellation under section 7(4) of the Act a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hubar Mandal Harihar Mandal v. The State of Bihar[1957] 8 S.T.C. 770 at p. 779 (S.C.).The order needs to be quashed on this short ground. The second objection of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that although in the order dated 30th January, 1968, only the cancellation of the registration certificate bearing No. AMR-IV-11753 was decided upon, in the communication letter mention was also made of the registration certificate No. AMR-CST-3391 as having been cancelled. There is substance in this submission of the learned counsel as it is clear that the registration certificate under the Central Sales Tax Act bearing No. AMR-CST-3391 is not mentioned as having been cancelled in the order of the Assessing Authority dated 30th January,....