2019 (4) TMI 1404

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rement as envisaged under Section 55 (1) of the Act? (iii) whether any action or the impugned order can be passed against the appellant under Section 55(6) (C) of the Act without serving upon him mandatorily required show cause notice in form 46 ? (iv) whether the impugned orders passed by Assistant Commercial Tax Commissioner thereby imposing penalty under Section 55(6)(C) is without jurisdiction because the same has been passed without following due procedure as contemplated under law and also without serving the mandatorily required notice in form 46 upon the appellant. (v) whether the findings recorded by the Assistant Commissioner with regard to evasion of tax by appellant on the estimated cost of Rs. 11,50,426/- of the stock which was found during search on 2.7.07, are perverse being contrary to record ?" 2. The substantial question proposed at (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) are similar. The substantial question which therefore arises for consideration are: (i) Whether there existed prior recording of reasons as contemplated under Sub-section (1) of Section 55 of the Act of 2002 by the Commissioner Commercial Tax to conduct the search? ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent to evade the tax, the Assessee is not making available account notice under 55(6)(C) of the Act of 2002 in Form 48 was issued on 07/07/2007. After receiving notice, Appellant appeared on 10/07/2007 and sought time. The matter was posted on 18/07/2007. The Appellant, however, did not appear; therefore, proceeded ex parte and was assessed to tax of Rs. 1,58,184/- on the unaccounted stock of Rs. 12,65,469/- @ 12.5% and penalty @ 3.5 times i.e. Rs. 5,53,644/-. Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax in its assessment order found that, godowns where the stock was found were not depicted in the Registration Certificate and the stock discovered were related to sanitary fittings, floor tiles, glass, plastic goods, kitchen articles, Bath Tub etc. 7. Following findings were recorded by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax: 8. First Appeal preferred against the assessment order dated dated 18/07/2007 was dismissed on 04/08/2008 by the First Appellate Authority, Deputy Commissioner Commercial Tax Gwalior. Whereagainst Second Appeal preferred before Appellate Board was dismissed by the order impugned herein. 9. In these fact situation, the proposed substantial question of l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thout close scrutiny, the claim of the passport authority that it would not be in the interests of the general public to disclose the reasons. The passport authority would have to satisfy the court by placing proper material that the giving of reasons would be clearly and indubitably against the interests of the general public and if the Court is not so satisfied, the Court may require the passport authority to disclose the reasons, subject to any valid and lawful claim for privilege which may be set up on behalf of the Government. Here in the present case, as we have already pointed out, the Central Government did initially claim that it would be against the interests of the general public to disclose the reasons for impounding the passport, but when it, came to filing the affidavit in reply, the Central Government very properly abandoned this unsustainable claim and disclosed the reasons The question whether these reasons have any nexus with the interests of the general public or they are extraneous and irrelevant is a matter which we shall examine when we deal with the arguments of the parties, ,Meanwhile, proceeding further with the resume of the relevant provisions, reference ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... any of the officers referred to in clauses (c) to (g) of sub-section (1) of section 3 to proceed to investigate into the tax evasion by such dealer." 15. The respondents thus have adverted to second part of Subsection (1) of Section 55 of Act of 2002 which empowers the Commissioner to direct any of the Officers referred to in Clauses (c) to (h) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 to proceed to investigate. The contention that "no reason to inspect/search business premises is required to be given", indicates that the Commissioner did not record any reason to believe the correctness of the information of tax, evasion received by him to form basis for investigation. This fact is further established when despite the order dated 04/08/2016, the respondent has failed to keep the original file present at the time of hearing for perusal of this Court to ensure whether any reason has been recorded by the Commissioner before issuing directions under Section 55(1) of the Act of 2002. The provisions as adverted supra being mandatory, non compliance thereof, in our considered opinion, vitiated the entire proceedings. Thus when the foundation is found to be defective, the entire superstructur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....¤µà¤¿à¤¤ कर की दर 12.5 प्रतिशत है. यह स्टॉक सैनेटनी फिटिंग, फ्लोर टाइल्स, ग्लास, प्लास्टिक गुडस, किचिन आर्टिकल्स बाथटव, आदि से संबंधित है. अतः इनका कल्पित विक्रम मूल्य रूपये 1265469.00 निर्धारित किया गया जिसपर प्रभावित कर की राशि रूपये 158184.00 बनती है । व्....