9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (3) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... REDDY, J.-The petitioner is a dealer registered under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act carrying on business in rice and other foodgrains at Hyderabad. On 20th April, 1959, he purchased 150 bags of rice from another registered dealer Sri Lakshmi Trading Company, Nizamabad, for Rs. 6,320.75 under invoice No. 3. He also paid sales tax to the seller. According to the petitioner, the goods wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The order of the Deputy Commissioner was questioned by the petitioner in W.P. No. 1685 of 1959. The High Court by its order dated 28th November, 1960, directed the 1st respondent (the Deputy Commissioner) to give notice to the petitioner and hold an enquiry as contemplated by section 28(6) of the Act. While the writ petition was pending in the High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the transaction was not properly accounted for. The goods having already been released to the petitioner on furnishing security, the Deputy Commissioner directed that the security should be forfeited. The petitioner filed an appeal to the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, but the appeal was rejected on the ground that it was not maintainable. Thereupon, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdicti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urse of his business: Provided that before taking action for the confiscation of goods under this sub-section, the officer shall give the person affected an opportunity of being heard and make an enquiry in the prescribed manner." A perusal of section 28(6) of the Act clearly shows that the same officer that seizes the goods has to make the order of confiscation. This does not, of course, mean th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
