9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (10) TMI 715X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs challenged the action of the respondent No. 1 before the Tribunal. The respondent No. 1 contended that the application of the petitioners had been rejected because the requirement was not bona fide or reasonable. 2.. By an order dated September 20, 1999, the Tribunal directed the respondent No. 1 to reconsider the matter after giving the petitioners an opportunity of being heard. The respondent No. 1 was directed to pass a reasoned order. The petitioners duly appeared before the respondent again. The respondent No. 1 passed an order recalling his earlier order rejecting the petitioner application but stating in the order that the petitioners' had not paid the tax on the sugar which was previously imported and sold by it. The petitioners ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fied with the correctness of the particulars furnished in the application or statement of account of way-bill in form 42A or form 48A issued to him on the last two occasions, it may, pending enquiry or investigation into the matter by it or by such other authority as the Commissioner may authorise or direct, issue such number of way-bill forms to the registered dealer as may, in its opinion satisfy the immediate requirement of such dealer." 5.. It is clear from the aforesaid sub-rule that the grounds upon which the way-bills may be refused are (i) incorrectness; (ii) incompleteness and (iii) requirement is unreasonable. If these three grounds are not there, the respondent No. 1 is bound to issue the required number of way-bills. It is als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondents has stated that, in fact, no such restrictions or conditions have been prescribed under section 68(1). 10.. We also take note of the fact that in earlier proceedings the Tribunal has passed orders similar to those asked for by the petitioners herein. We, see no reason why the Tribunal should have adopted a different approach in the petitioners' case. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by modifying the order of the Tribunal to the effect that the respondent No. 1 shall dispose of the matter within 48 hours from date and while disposing of the petitioners prayer for way-bills, the respondent No. 1 shall not refuse the same on the ground of non-payment of tax as mentioned in the impugned order. The writ petition is accordi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
