2000 (5) TMI 1067 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Validity of show-cause notice and detention of goods
- Interpretation of circular issued by State Government
- Conflict between circular and statutory rules
- Applicability of judicial precedents in administrative matters

Issue 1: Validity of show-cause notice and detention of goods
The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to quash a show-cause notice and mandamus for releasing detained goods. It was argued that the detention by the Trade Tax Officer was in violation of a circular stating that once a vehicle crossed the entry check post, it should not be checked by the mobile squad.

Issue 2: Interpretation of circular issued by State Government
The circular issued by the State Government was central to the dispute. The petitioner contended that the detention was against the circular's provisions, which exempted vehicles once they crossed the entry check post. However, the Department argued that the circular could not override statutory rules, specifically Rule 84 (1) of the U. P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948.

Issue 3: Conflict between circular and statutory rules
The crux of the argument lay in the conflict between the circular and the statutory rules. While the petitioner relied on judicial precedents emphasizing the binding nature of circulars issued by the government, the Department cited a previous decision to support its position that circulars cannot supersede statutory provisions.

Issue 4: Applicability of judicial precedents in administrative matters
Various Supreme Court judgments were cited by both parties to support their arguments. The petitioner referenced cases emphasizing the importance of adhering to circulars for uniformity and consistency in administrative actions. In contrast, the Department relied on a specific case to assert that circulars cannot override statutory regulations.

The judgment concluded by establishing the legal principle that a circular issued by the State Government is binding on the departmental authority, and they cannot disown its applicability. However, due to factual discrepancies regarding the truck's passage through the check post, the matter was referred to the Additional Commissioner, Trade Tax for resolution within a specified timeframe. The petition was disposed of with directions for further action based on the factual verification.