TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 943
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., assisted by Dr. A. Todi, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Choudhury, Standing Counsel, Finance & Taxation Department. JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL) (VIJAY BISHNOI, CJ) These writ appeals are preferred by the appellants being aggrieved with the common order dated 05.11.2019 passed in WP(C) No. 6363/2014 and WP(C) No.6364/2014 and the orders dated 25.01.2021 passed in I.A. (Civil) No. 956/2020 and I.A. (Civil) No.1262/2020. 2. Brief facts of the cases are that the appellants approached the Writ Court by way of filing WP(C) No.6363/2014 and WP(C) No. 6364/2014 assailing the search and seizure proceedings conducted in the appellants' Firm on 03.09.2014 by the Taxation Authorities, in exercise of powers conferred under Sections 74 (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... while passing the impugned order on 05.11.2019, no one appeared on behalf of the appellants before the learned Single Judge. 5. It appears that after the decision dated 05.11.2019, the appellants moved I.A. (Civil) No. 956/2020 and I.A. (Civil) No. 1262/2020 in the writ petitions, which were disposed of vide order dated 05.11.2019, seeking clarification or direction declaring the impugned process of search and seizure as illegal and improper, with a further prayer that the subsequent assessment order dated 31.12.2014 and the notice of demand dated 02.01.2015, issued during the pendency of the writ petitions and a further notice of demand dated 30.10.2020 issued after disposal of the writ petitions be set aside. 6. The learned Single Judg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ty of the said seizure challenged in the writ petition, but made an observation that if any cause of action still survives, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum. 7. It has been stated that after disposal of the said writ petition WP(C) No. 6363/2014 on 05.11.2019, the authorities issued the demand notice on 30.10.2020 purportedly in exercise of the earlier process, which was put to challenge in the aforesaid writ petition. 8. Accordingly, the present Interlocutory Application has been filed challenging the said demand notice dated 30.10.2020. 9. This Court is of the view that since the aforesaid writ petition, WP(C) No. 6363/2014 has been already disposed of by this Court on 05.11.2019, it would be m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e counsel of the petitioner as none appeared for the petitioner on that day. However, this Court referring to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondents did not go into the correctness of the impugned search and seizure but made an observation that the provisions of CrPC, 1973 ought to be scrupulously adhered to at the time of effecting any search and seizure, viz., while conducting the same under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003. 6. Since the search and seizure of the documents were effected way back on 03.09.2014, this Court did not make any finding but as regards the validity of the said seizure challenged in the writ petition, but made an observation that if any cause of action still survives, the petitioner would be at ....