Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + SC VAT and Sales Tax - 2008 (4) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (4) TMI 491 - SUPREME COURTWhether the notice of hearing has been received by the respondent? Whether he had been heard or not? As to why was it necessary to retain the seized records for examination for another year, although the said record had already been in the custody of the appellants for a period of one year? Held that:- The Additional Commissioner while granting sanction to retain the seized records has not only recorded reasons therefor, but the same were communicated. Thus, the condition prescribed by law to record reasons is fulfilled. The order which was received by the assessee a few days later was despatched the same day. The delay in no way has caused any prejudice to the assessee. Moreover, we are informed that the books of account/documents were returned to the assessee after the passing of the order by the Tribunal. To that extent, the appeal has become infructuous, but since the point involved is of recurring nature, we thought it appropriate to record a finding regarding the correctness or otherwise of the view taken by the High Court on merits. In case the investigation or assessment is not complete then the respondent whose books of account have been returned, may not be asked to re-deposit the books of account with the assessing officer but as and when he is called upon to produce the books of account/documents which were returned to the assessee, the assessee shall be under an obligation to produce the documents before the authorities as and when asked to do so.
|