9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 865X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of seizure - Held that:- Tribunal has correctly held that, if the registered dealer is not carrying on business from its registered address, but is carrying on business from some other address, then, VAT Act itself provides what penalty may be imposed upon such dealer. That being the situation, we feel that the Tribunal has rightly held that the FIR, insofar as that allegation is concerned, was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the court was delivered by BARIN GHOSH C.J.- The respondent was a registered dealer. This registration was suspended because an FIR was lodged. In the FIR, the only allegation against the respondent was that, in course of inquiry pertaining to a seizure, it transpired that the respondent is not available at the place of its business, as mentioned in the challan that was found in course of seiz ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmitted that the order of the Tribunal be not construed as a complete bar on the part of the tax officers of the State in lodging FIRs. The fact remains that the Tribunal has not debarred them from doing so. The Tribunal has permitted that part of the FIR to be investigated in accordance with law, which is not covered by the provisions of the VAT Act and, accordingly, has recognised that, in rela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
