9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the FIR in question is nothing but an abuse of the process of law as even from its bare reading prima facie no offence is made out against the petitioner. The petitioner was issued Value Added Tax (in short, 'VAT') registration bearing TIN 03882098358 and in all his business transactions the aforesaid TIN stands reflected. He has further submitted that the gist of the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the FIR in question are of evading VAT, however, since the Punjab VAT Act, 2005 (for short, 'the Act') is a complete code in itself and operates in exclusion to the general law including the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (fort short, 'the IPC'), no FIR could have been registered against the petitioner. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntinuation of proceedings in the FIR in question would amount to double jeopardy moreso, as already submitted earlier, penalty already stood imposed upon the petitioner under the Act. 4. Learned counsel, in support, has placed reliance upon Dilawar Singh Vs. Parvinder Singh @ Iqbal Singh and another : 2005(4) RCR (Criminal) 855; CRM-M-16957-2013 titled as 'Naresh Kumar Vs. State of Punjab and others' decided on 19.09.2014; CRMM- 34295-2012 titled as 'Pawan Kumar and others Vs. State of Punjab and another' decided on 22.08.2014; CRM-M-17413-2013 titled as 'Jaswant Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab' decided on 12.01.2015; CRM-M-14539-2014 titled as 'Sandeep Kumar and another Vs. State of Punjab' decided on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uer had incurred losses to the tune of Rs. 2,44,73,487/-. A prayer was, thus, made for dismissal of the instant petition as a prima facie case against the petitioner was made out. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant material on record. 7. Admittedly, the allegations levelled in the FIR qua the commission of the offences in question, emanate entirely from the alleged evasion of VAT by the petitioner. The gist of the allegations against the petitioner is that he forged and fabricated invoices against bogus purchases to credit bogus ITC and further the petitioner was granted registration certificate only for resale of nuts and bolts and HR sheets, however, he was also found to be illegally trading in iron ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the registration of an FIR. The Act only provides for imposition of penalty in case there is any contravention of its provisions. Since the Act is a special law, principle of generalia specialibus non derogant would apply, meaning thereby, it would operate in exclusion to the general law i.e. the IPC. 11. A Coordinate Bench of this Court in Pritpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab, while relying upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dilawar Singh's case (supra) held that the provision of the Act are sufficient and equipped to deal with the matter where an attempt is made to evade the Tax and the registration of FIR in such like matter is totally an abuse of the process of law. 12. Furthermore, it is a matter of record that an asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
