TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel for the Revenue, can’t satisfy the legal requirement of recording reason(s), prior to making of the seizure. Thus it is held that the seizure made under section 44(3) of the AGST Act doesn’t fulfil the requirement of section 44(3) of the AGST Act and accordingly the impugned action can’t be sustained and the same are quashed. The consequential assessment made on the basis of the said seizure is also interfered with. Appeal allowed. - W.P. (C) No. 9384 of 2004 - - - Dated:- 31-3-2011 - HRISHIKESH ROY, J. ORDER:- HRISHIKESH ROY J. Heard Mr. K. Choudhury, learned counsel appear ing for the petitioners. Mr. R. Dubey, learned standing counsel, represents the Revenue. The petitioners challenge the notice dated May 15, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the basis of such reasoning which has to be recorded in writing, a seizure exercise can be undertaken in exercise of powers under sub-section (3) of section 44 of the AGST Act. For ready reference, the provisions of section 44(3) of the AGST Act is extracted hereinbelow: 44. (3) If any authority appointed under sub-section (1) of section 3 has reason to suspect that any dealer is to evade the payment of any tax or any clearing or forwarding agent or a person transporting goods or any owner of a warehouse or a godown is keeping or has kept his accounting in such a manner as is likely to cause evasion of tax payable under this Act, such authority may for reasons to be recorded in writing, seize such accounts, registers or documents of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned counsel further submits that the authority suspected the transactions to be inter-State sales which are leviable to tax under the Central Sales Tax Act and therefore the State sales tax authorities were competent to issue the impugned notice. Finally Mr. Dubey refers to the notification dated 21st September, 1993 under Memo of CTS-8/76/Pt/29 of the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam to show that the power of the Commissioner exercisable under section 44 of the AGST Act, has been delegated to the Inspector of Tax attached to the Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences), Guwahati and as such he submits that the seizure was made by a duly authorized officer. A reading of the notice dated May 15, 2004 of the Inspector of Taxes i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of tax under the AGST Act. The Division Bench in the above judgment, relied upon the decision of the apex court in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes v. Ramkishan Shrikishan Jhaver reported in [1967] 20 STC 453 (SC); AIR 1968 SC 59, wherein the Supreme Court in paragraph 18 observed as follows (page 468 in 20 STC): 18. Next we come to sub-section (3), which as we have already stated, is complementary to sub-section (2). It provides in addition to the safeguards which have to be complied with when a search is made under sub-section (2), that the officer may seize accounts, etc., if he has reason to suspect that any dealer is attempting to evade the payment of any tax, etc., due from him under the Act. It also provides that the offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
