1953 (8) TMI 19 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Petition under Article 226 challenging State Government's refusal to grant copies of documents for assessment case before Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, sought copies of instructions modifying a previous memorandum related to sales tax assessment. The State Government rejected the request for copies, prompting the petitioner to file a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The main contention raised was the refusal of the State Government to provide the required documents.

The Court pointed out that the remedy for production of documents was available under the C.P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947. Section 20 of the Act empowered the Commissioner or appointed persons to compel document production, akin to a Civil Court. It was noted that the petitioner had not utilized this remedy by applying to the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax for document production. The Assistant Commissioner was considered an officer with the authority to compel document production. As such, the Court emphasized that the petitioner should have first exhausted the remedy under the Act before resorting to Article 226 of the Constitution.

Ultimately, the Court dismissed the application, citing the availability of an efficacious and expeditious remedy under the Sales Tax Act. No costs were awarded, and the petitioner was entitled to a refund of the outstanding security amount. The judgment highlighted the importance of utilizing statutory remedies before seeking extraordinary relief through Article 226.

In conclusion, the Court's decision emphasized the need to exhaust statutory remedies before approaching the High Court under Article 226. The judgment underscored the significance of following procedural requirements and utilizing available legal mechanisms for document production in assessment cases, thereby ensuring a just and fair disposal of matters related to sales tax assessment.