1971 (3) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cedure in connection with the filing of returns under the Central Sales Tax Act and the connected rules thereunder. He would also state that some of the packets of synthetic diamonds so sent by him to the prospective buyers were returned back as not approved. The case of the petitioner is that, on the basis of the despatches made by him of the diamonds and without taking into consideration fully the quantum and value of the diamonds returned by the prospective buyers, a proposal has been made to assess the petitioner on the basis of such despatches and on the foot that such despatches resulted in a sale in the eye of law. The first respondent, viz., the Joint Commercial Tax Officer, Gandhi Market, Tiruchirapalli, gave the impugned notice wh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntion of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in so far as the second respondent is concerned, he is bound to furnish information at least as regards the articles addressed to him. But the counsel for the postal department urges that rule 17 lays an embargo on the department in the matter of furnishing any records of any post office to any person or permitting anyone to examine any article not addressed to him though the article may have been posted by him. The further contention is that under the rules no person not belonging to the department may be permitted to examine the records of any post office and such person cannot be permitted to examine any article not addressed to him though the article may have been posted by him. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mining him on oath or affirmation. The first respondent therefore has the necessary authority to issue summons and secure the information. In this context it is not necessary to make the rule nisi absolute as against the second respondent. It is therefore discharged. As regards the first respondent there has been no failure of public duty on his part since no application to summon has been made; but the petitioner's case is that principles of natural justice would be violated and there would not be a fair hearing or a fair assessment if an opportunity is not given to him to secure all the information regarding the articles sent by him and sent back to him from the post office in question and unless the first respondent secures such documen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X