TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (2) TMI 789
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed judgment. The case in brief is that the petitioner applied for eligibility certificate for running his business under section 39 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. He got registration certificate issued for the purpose of his business and he submitted returns regularly showing the turnover of his business. A notice to show cause was issued upon the petitioner asking him to appear on July 21, 1999 and show cause as to why the registration certificate should not be cancelled. The petitioner prayed for adjournment but since then nothing was informed to the petitioner and registration certificate was cancelled. The point came up for consideration as to whether the order of cancellation of registration certificate is legal, prop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions. At the same time, it can also be said that had the petitioner been careful and serious about his business, he could have enquired about the fate of his prayer for adjournment. The learned lawyer for the respondents, relying on the case reported in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Laxminarain Badridas [1937] 5 ITR 170 (PC) and Nagendra Nath Shah v. State of West Bengal [1957] 8 STC 641 (Cal), submitted that it was not their duty to inform the date of adjournment to the parties in each and every case. The responsibility also lies upon the petitioner to get the next hearing date from the office of the respondents. It is correct to say that the petitioner must be alert to protect his right and should have made attempt to know the next dat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave exhausted all the procedures under rules for service of notice upon the addressee before taking any presumption of lack of seriousness or sincerity of the petitioner to take part in the proceedings initiated against him. The respondents should have followed the provisions of the rule 278, which states, as follows: "Service of notice.-(1) Any notice which is issued under the provisions of the Act or the rules made thereunder may be served on a dealer, casual trader, or person by any of the following methods, namely:- (a) personally upon the addressee, if present, (b) by messenger including a courier, (c) by registered post: Provided that if the authority issuing the notice is satisfied that an attempt has bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gure for the period from September 16, 1998 to September 30, 1999. Even, if it is accepted that there was suppression of sales, then also, it cannot be held to be a valid ground for cancellation of registration certificate. For the reasons discussed above, we, therefore, hold that the order of cancellation of registration certificate depriving the petitioner from giving him the opportunity of being heard is illegal. The order dated August 12, 1999 passed by the respondent No. 1 should, therefore, be set aside. Consequently, all the orders passed by the revisional authorities dated July 5, 2000, August 30, 2000 and January 9, 2000 do not stand in the eye of law. Accordingly, all the aforesaid impugned orders are set aside and the learn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tice was served upon the petitioner before holding ex parte hearing of assessment for the relevant periods and if the ex parte orders are legal and valid and (2) if the application for eligibility certificate was rightly rejected. We have already observed in RN-148 of 2001 that the service of notice has to be made in accordance with the rule 278 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995. There is no evidence on record that the notice for hearing was served upon the petitioner by exhausting all measures as provided in the said rule. Even if, it is accepted that the petitioner duly received the notice well ahead the date of hearing, still point remains for consideration, if at all, the ex parte orders were passed after due consideration of ....