TMI Blog2000 (4) TMI 798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing was initiated by the authorities by issuing an appropriate notice. The transporter however, filed an application for release of the said goods questioning the seizure thereof in terms of section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, on December 8, 1999, whereupon the learned Tribunal directed that the goods as also the documents be released within 24 hours. According to Mr. Ghosh, the said order had been passed without asking the petitioner herein to file an affidavit in support of his case and/or without giving an opportunity of hearing. On the said date, however, the matter was disposed of finally. Allegedly, in the evening of December 8, 1999, in response to a fax message sent by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to the Commissioner of Sales Tax, Government of Gujarat, with a copy to the Gujarat Trading Company, who was the alleged consignor, it was reported by one Gujarat Industrial Corporation, whose fax number and the fax number of Gujarat Trading Company are the same, that the latter had no concern with the goods in question. 4.. Upon receiving the said information, the Commercial Tax Officer, Chichira Check Post, lodged a compliant to the Superintendent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar's case [1997] 105 STC 618 as the Tribunal is a writ court at the first instance, it has jurisdiction to see that the executive authority should not frustrate the effectiveness of its order, and for that purpose has resorted to the process of initiating a criminal proceeding with regard whereto it had competence to interfere to the required extent. The Tribunal, however, did not direct disruption of the trial so as to attract the provision of section 6(2) of the 1987 Act, whereby the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to try criminal offences is ousted. As regards the merits, it was found that the subsequent seizure purported to be on the basis of the aforementioned fax message received from Gujarat Industrial Corporation cannot be a ground for subsequent seizure. The Tribunal recorded: "It is deplorable that the Revenue should take shelter of initiation of a criminal proceeding in order to defeat the order of this Tribunal. The entire jurisdiction of this Tribunal will be in jeopardy if the sales tax authorities concerned are permitted to flout the order of this Tribunal in that manner because in that event justice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Taxation Tribunal Act has to be given a wide meaning, inasmuch as, the Bureau of Investigation to whom the complaint and/or first information report was made, being itself a creature in terms of 1994 Act, the Tribunal had jurisdiction over the matter. Section 6 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, reads thus: "6. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Tribunal.-(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the Tribunal shall exercise, with effect from such date as may be specified by the State Government by notification in this behalf, all the jurisdiction, powers and authority exercisable immediately before that day by all Courts including the High Court but excluding the Supreme Court of India for adjudication or trial of disputes or complaints or offences with respect to all matters of levy, assessment, collection and enforcement of any tax under any specified State Act and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto: Provided that where the matter relates to disposal of question of constitutional validity of any provision of any specified State Act, the matter shall be decided by a Bench constituted of at least three Members of which the Chairman sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection (1) of section 6 of the Act. Such an incidental power, as is well-known, must be exercised, as an adjunct of the main matter in a proceeding pending before it, and not after a proceeding has been disposed of. The learned Tribunal, in our opinion, committed a grave error in holding that its order could not have been nullified by a sham criminal prosecution. The question as to whether a criminal proceeding is a sham one, or not, was beyond the purview of the scope of section 6(1) of the Act. The Tribunal immediately realised its mistake by observing that it had no jurisdiction in view of the ouster clause contained in sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Act in relation to matters over which courts exercise jurisdiction under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The aforementioned findings are absolutely contradictory in nature. Only a court which has taken cognizance of the seizure is competent to release goods and/or vehicles in exercise of its power under section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and thus, as the said power was to be exercised by a Magistrate having jurisdiction to deal therewith under the provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in terms of sub-section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
