9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (9) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 (2 of 1959)-hereinafter referred to as the Act-is entitled to remove obstruction to the inspection of account books; in other words, if he attempts to remove the obstruction is he acting in the execution of his duties as such. The facts are not in dispute. On October 24, 1959, Krishan Sahai, Sales Tax Inspector, P.W. 1, along with Shri N.J. Warudkar, P.W. 5 and Shri Harikishan Gupta, P.W. 2, went to the shop of the appellant Mangat Rai, run under the name and style "Mangat Rai Ram Kumar". The officer visited the shop for a surprise check. He informed the appellant that he wanted to inspect his account books. At that time they were in the verandah which is common to the shop of the appellant and the neighbouring shop of Munshiram. It is perhaps best to describe what happened in the words of the Inspector: "I entered the shop of the accused for inspection and Shri Warudkar entered the shop of Munshiram. The accused, Harikishan and myself all three entered the shop of the accused. I and Harikishan sat on the Gadi of the accused and the accused Mangat Rai sat near the iron safe. I asked the accused person to show his account books for inspection. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evasion of inspection and commission of an offence in his very presence." In the result the High Court allowed the appeal and convicted Mangat Rai under section 353 and section 506(1) and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for four months on each count, the sentences to run concurrently. The learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Chari, contends that the Act contemplates voluntary submission to inspection and that there cannot be any forcible inspection of accounts. He says that if there is any obstruction to inspection it may be punishable under section 46(h) of the Act, but the Sales Tax Inspector cannot do anything to forcibly inspect the accounts. He urges that what has happened in this case is an attempt on the part of the Sales Tax Inspector to exercise the powers under section 29(3) of the Act, and it is common ground that the Sales Tax Inspector did not have power to act under section 29(3). In order to appreciate the arguments of the learned counsel it is necessary to set out the relevant provisions of the Act and the Rules. Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. "Section 29. Production and inspection of accounts and documents and search of premises.- (1) The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax Act, 1959 (1 of 1959), which reads as follows: "41. (2) All accounts, registers, records and other documents maintained by a dealer in the course of his business, the goods in his possession and his offices, shops, godowns, vessels or vehicles shall be open to inspection at all reasonable times by such officer: Provided that no residential accommodation (not being a place of business-cum-residence) shall be entered into and searched by such officer except on the authority of a search warrant issued by a Magistrate having jurisdiction over the area, and all searches under this sub-section shall, so far as may be, be made in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Central Act 5 of 1898)." The contention of the respondent in that case was that the provisions did not authorise search of premises but merely provided for inspection thereof at all reasonable times by the empowered officer. This court observed: "Though, therefore, the word 'search' has not been used in sub- section (2), these two powers of entering the offices, etc., for inspection and of inspecting every kind of account maintained by a dealer with respect to his business togeth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferred to us the decision of this court in Hazari Lal v. State of Bihar [1963] Supp. 1 S.C.R. 419, 425; 14 S.T.C. 398, 403., where this court observed: "In our opinion merely holding books found lying in the premises for perusing them cannot properly be regarded as seizure because seizure implies doing something over and above holding an article in one's hand. According to Shorter Oxford Dictionary, seizure, among other things, means '.......confiscation or forcible taking possession (land or goods); a sudden and forcible taking hold.' As already stated, Mr. Singh merely picked up the books which were lying in the shop and did not snatch them away from any one nor did he take them by force. On the contrary they were taken away by force by the appellant. If, indeed, he had retrieved them by force it may have been possible to urge that the latter act of his amounts to seizure." In our opinion the last sentence quoted above is an obiter, and we must examine the question independently whether the attempt made by the Sales Tax Inspector in this case to take possession of the account books from the hands of the appellant's son amounts to seizure or does it amount only to an attempt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
