2013 (3) TMI 229

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ernment Advocate ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for taxes, appearing on behalf of the respondents.   2. It has been stated that, on 7.9.2012, the second respondent, along with his officers, had conducted a spot inspection at the business premises of the petitioner. They had verified the records maintained by the petiti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f of the petitioner had submitted that the second respondent had no authority or power to collect the amount of Rs.2,93,179/-, as tax, by way of a cheque, during the inspection of the business premises of the petitioner, without issuing a prior notice and without passing an order of assessment, relating to the assessment years 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Therefore, the cheque bearing No....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....siness premises of the petitioner. It is not proper for the second respondent and his officers to demand the payment of tax, by the petitioner, amounting to a sum of Rs.2,93,179/-, without issuing a prior notice and without passing an assessment order, after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to file its objections, if any. As such, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the respondents to....