2001 (1) TMI 931

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itioner has questioned the action of the respondents (sales tax authorities) in cancelling the registration certificate granted to the petitioner and also claim consequential reliefs. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. They, however, need mention infra. 2.. The petitioner is a dealer carrying on business of manufacture and sale of wooden articles under the State Sales Tax as also Ce....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etitioner's registration certificate has been cancelled by their order dated October 8, 1992. The Forest Department was asked to take note of this fact and proceed accordingly. It is this action of the respondents (sales tax authorities) which is impugned in this petition. 4.. The State by filing return has tried to support the impugned action. 5.. Heard Shri P.M. Choudhary, learned counsel ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... sent/communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner came to know of such proceeding when on October 9, 1992, i.e., next day, the sales tax authorities sent a letter to forest authorities informing them of cancellation of petitioner's certificate by their order dated October 8, 1992. Even in this Court, the respondents have not filed a copy of the so called order dated October 8, 1992. It is, ther....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... aforesaid discussion, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Impugned communication dated October 9, 1992 [annexures P10(1), P10(2) and P11] are quashed. The respondent No. 2 is directed to hold a proper inquiry and after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to represent his case, and after taking into account the reply filed by the petitioner on October 8, 1992 (annexure P9), pass a reasoned o....