1971 (3) TMI 106 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Illegal search and seizure of documents under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957.

Analysis:

The judgment by the Mysore High Court dealt with two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, raising common legal questions regarding the illegal search and seizure of documents under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioner, an assessee under the Act, alleged that the Commercial Tax Officer-II, Intelligence Branch, along with his staff, raided the petitioner's business premises and seized books of accounts and documents. The second respondent issued a show cause notice, alleging suppression of turnover and non-production of invoices for certain items. The petitioner contended that the seizure was illegal and demanded the return of the documents, leading to the filing of writ petitions seeking the return of seized documents and quashing of proceedings. The second respondent claimed that the documents were voluntarily provided, justifying his actions under Section 28 of the Act.

The Court analyzed Section 28 of the Act, which empowers officers to order the production of accounts and documents for inspection. The Court noted that the second respondent failed to follow the prescribed procedure and did not inform the petitioner before the visit. The Court found that the seizure was unauthorized and illegal, as the documents were not voluntarily handed over. The subsequent exchange of letters between the parties further supported the petitioner's claims of an illegal search and seizure. The Court emphasized that officers must strictly adhere to the law while exercising search powers to protect citizens' rights and privacy.

Regarding the relief sought, the Court rejected the government pleader's argument that the second respondent could retain copies of seized documents, emphasizing that all property recovered from an illegal search must be returned to its owner. Citing a decision by the Madras High Court, the Court directed the return of all seized documents, copies, and notes to the petitioners. The Court also quashed the proceedings initiated based on the illegal search and seizure. Ultimately, the Court allowed the writ petitions, ordering the return of seized documents and quashing the proceedings against the petitioners.