TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (8) TMI 875
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ral. The controversies involved in these revisions are interconnected and interwoven and as was suggested by the learned counsel for the parties are being disposed of by a common judgment. The applicant who is engaged in the business of foodgrains, galla, tilhan, bardana, kirana, gur, rab, posta dana and oil cake, etc., applied for and was granted registration under section 8A of the Act and under section 7 of the Central Sales Tax Act. The registration was granted on March 22, 1999 and a security of Rs. 15,000 of two registered dealers under the Act was furnished as demanded by the Department. The returns of the turnover were filed regularly and the admitted tax was paid promptly as alleged by the applicant. The applicant has a head offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he provisions of the Act? (ii) Whether additional security could be demanded where none of the conditions prescribed under the Acts was present or alleged? (iii) Whether additional security demanded is disproportionate to the tax payable? (iv) Whether any additional security could be demanded without issuance of the show-cause notice? (v) Whether the Tribunal could take into consideration any ground or reason which was not considered by the lower authorities?" Shri S.D. Singh, the learned counsel appearing for the dealer, submits that on the plain language of section 8C, there was no occasion for the Department to demand any additional security as otherwise it would amount to violation of the right of the dealer to carry on free trade.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty. He is an original resident of the district of Bareilly and has declared its head office at Kayamganj and has therefrom carried on the transactions worth only Rs. 10,000 till the passing of the order demanding additional security. It is also not in dispute that he has got a branch at Bareilly from where he has disclosed the taxable turnover at Rs. 13,12,740.27. On these admitted facts a question arises as to whether the demand of additional security is at all justified or not. Section 8C of the Act provides for security in the interest of the Revenue. Sub-section (2) thereof provides where it appears necessary to the assessing authority for proper realization of any tax, penalty or other such dues payable under the Act, it may demand ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ority on the turnover of the dealer for the assessment year in which such security is required to be furnished. Coming to the facts of the present case, it is not the case of the dealer-opposite party that abruptly the turnover for the month of July 1999 was increased abnormally as a windfall. The circumstances which have been taken into consideration by the assessing officer such as that the dealer has no property at Farrukhabad wherein he is carrying on the business, that the turnover disclosed at Farrukhabad is very nominal and that the turnover disclosed at its branch at Bareilly is very high, cannot be said to be irrelevant or irrational for demanding the additional security. The learned counsel, then, submits that section 8C is not ....