9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (2) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the absence of rules prescribing the conditions for the exercise of power under section 16(1) of the Act, the power remains in abeyance and no action could be taken in exercise of the said power." 2.. Facts relevant to the aforesaid contentions, shorn of details, may only be stated. For the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 the assessments were made on 13th January, 1966, and 22nd March, 1967, respectively. On 9th January, 1968, an order (annexure A) was recorded by the Sales Tax Officer which runs thus: "Issue notice under section 16(1) for production of accounts for the years 1964-65 and 1965-66 for examination with reference to the seized accounts to check up if the figures relating to milling of paddy measuring 21807-57 bags ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... January, 1968." On the very same day, notice (annexure I) under section 16(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) by the Sales Tax Officer, Vigilance, for production of accounts of 1964-65 and 1965-66 was issued. On receipt of the notice the petitioner which is a partnership firm carrying on business and is a registered dealer under the Act filed a revision before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes under section 23(4) of the Act. The revision was dismissed by an order of the Commissioner (annexure II) on 5th February, 1968. The writ application was filed on 8th February, 1968. According to the department, notice under section 12(8) of the Act for the year 1964-65 was issued on 25th March, 1968. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub-section would stand thus: "The Commissioner may require any dealer to produce before him any accounts or documents, or to furnish any information, relating to the stocks of goods of, or purchases, sales and deliveries of goods by, the dealer as may be necessary for the purposes of this Act." The sub-section, as thus expressed after the exclusion of the parenthetic clause, can fully operate proprio vigore. The power that is conferred by the sub-section is to require the dealer to do various things mentioned therein as may be necessary for the purposes of the Act. The clause does not impose any limitation that until conditions are prescribed, the subsection would not operate. On a plain construction, it is clear that the power under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s". The expression "with reference to assessment proceedings at all stages" as used by their Lordships does not mean during the pendency of the proceedings. Their Lordships also emphasised that that power is to be exercised relating to the business of the dealer and not that of anybody else. The meaning of the expression "purposes of the Act" was construed as being for the "purposes of seeing that there is no evasion of tax". That the purpose of the Act is to see that there is no evasion of tax was emphasised in paragraphs 6 and 17 of the judgment. 5.. On a plain reading of section 16(1) of the Act it is clear that wide power has been conferred on the taxing authorities to call for accounts and the information as mentioned in section 16(1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y be exercised before any proceeding for assessment or escaped assessment is initiated. 6.. Coming to the facts of this case, it is clear that the Commissioner had information that there was suppression of the real taxable turnover. To verify whether the information given to the Commissioner is correct or not, the dealer was called upon under section 16(1) to produce the accounts. The exercise of the power under section 16(1) by the impugned notice cannot be questioned. 7.. If Mr. Rath had confined his argument only to these two contentions before the Division Bench there would have been no necessity to make a reference to the Full Bench. The reference arose on account of the fact that in the writ application a ground was taken in parag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .I.R. 1967 S.C. 587. The Division Bench was impressed with the contention of Mr. Mohapatra and as such a reference was made to the Full Bench to decide the correctness of B. Patnaik Mines (P.) Ltd. v. N.K. Mohanty, Sales Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Government of Orissa, Calcutta, and OthersI.L.R. 1967 Cutt. 446. and Uttareswari Rice Mills, Berhampur v. Sales Tax Officer, Intelligence Wing, Vigilance, Berhampur, and Another(1). Before the Full Bench, however, Mr. Rath did not press that contention and as such the necessity of examining the correctness of B. Patnaik Mines (P.) Ltd. v. N.K. Mohanty, Sales Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Government of Orissa, Calcutta, and OthersI.L.R. 1967 Cutt. 446. and Uttareswari Rice Mills, Berhampur v. Sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
