TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1996 (10) TMI 436
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e declared that he is not liable for the acts and omissions of his master and proprietor of the firm. 2.. In the petition, it has been averred, in short, as follows: The petitioner used to work as a manager in the firm whose proprietor was Mr. Sagar Singh. He left his service in January, 1995. Survey was conducted in the business premises of the firm. At that time he made it clear that he was the manager of the firm and had no part in financial dealings and personal interest in its business. A registered letter was also sent by him, inter alia, submitting that he was simply a manager. In November, 1995, the Commercial Taxes Department intimated him that a demand of Rs. 10,56,264 has been created against the firm and he was asked to depos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be dismissed with costs. 4.. In his rejoinder, the petitioner has said in respect of paras 3, 4, 6 and 12 of the reply only and has not said anything relating to remaining paras of the reply. 5.. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the applications, annexures 4 and 5, for registration certificate show that Sagar Singh was the proprietor of the said firm, in the assessment order, annexure 6, the name of the petitioner has simply been mentioned along with Sagar Singh and the said liability of the tax cannot be fastened upon the petitioner. 6.. In reply, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the department that the entire business was being carried on by the petitioner under the name and sty....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s. Adinath & Sons during the relevant period. It would be best to quote them here. They run as under: Chunki ukth firm ka samasth karobar Shri Subhash Tyagi dwara kiya gaya hai. Usi ne hi anek namaon se karapavanchan ke udheshia se parb M/s Dinesh Trading Company, M/s Sharma Brothers, M/s Ashok Kumar Sanjay Kumar, M/s Adhi Nath and Sons, M/s Mahalaxmi Traders, evam padosi vyakthiyon ke nam se license panjipan prapth kiye hai. Jabki en fimoan ke bank khathe Shri Subhash Tyagi ne hi operate kiya hai tatha krishi upaj mandi bikri kar vibhag mai karyavahiyan Shri Subhash Tyagi dwara ki gayi hai. Vibhin prakar ke sarvekshanon mai bhi Shri Subhash Tyagi upasthith rahe hain. Shikayat karta ke anusar Shri Subhash Tyagi en firmon ke malik hai. Tath....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hi Shri Subhash Tyagi dwara kiya gaya hai tatha kisi bhi usne ek manager ke roop mai en firmoan se vetan prapth nahi kiya hai va na hi ayakar vibhag se es vetan par kar nirdharan karvaya gaya hai. (kha) 4 - Uprokth sabhi firmoan ki Subhash Tyagi ne benami apne rishtedaroan ke naam se banai hai, jhan tak khudh vyaktiyoan ke naam va pita ka naam bhi do-do likhe gaye hain. Udharan ke liye firm Mahalakshmi Traders ke maalik ka naam Jaspal evam unke pita ka naam Shri Sagar Sinha urf Mahendra Pal Sinha dharshaya hai. Ek vyakthi ke do bhin-bhin naam pradharshith karna jaalsaji karne ka ghotak hai. (kha) 5 - Vyapari niyantar kar yogya maal bechta raha hai evam kar chuke maal ke bill deta raha hai evam eske ek bhi firm mai eska sathyapan nahi ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtificate. From these documents, it can only be said that applications, annexures 4 and 5, were moved for obtaining registration certificates in the name of M/s. Adinath & Sons, Sangariya. There is nothing on the record to show that these applications were in fact moved by Sagar Singh. The assessment order, annexure 6, shows that Sagar Singh was never found at the premises where the business was carried on under the name and style of M/s. Adinath & Sons, despite repeated efforts notice could not be served upon him and he never appeared before the assessing authority. The petitioner admits in his application that he was working in the premises where the business was being carried on under the name and style of M/s. Adinath & Sons, during the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion, it has been stated that the petitioner does not know the whereabouts of the proprietor of the firm, Sagar Singh. When the whereabouts of Sagar Singh (alleged to be the proprietor) were not known, and the petitioner (alleged to be the manager) had left the service, how the business of M/s. Adinath & Sons continued is beyond comprehension. His case that he was simply a manager of the firm could have been proved by producing the copies of the entries regarding the payment of his salary made in the account books of the firm. The petitioner could not even file an affidavit of Sagar Singh in support of his case. 11.. From acts and omissions enumerated in para No. 9 of the assessment order annexure 6, quoted in para No. 8 supra, it can we....