9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cks of arbitrariness and highhandedness of the authorities on the face of the record itself, which cannot be appreciated, in any manner. In the absence of any assessment, the action of respondent No.3 to take two cheques on 16.02.2015 amounting to ₹ 3 lacs each in favour of the respondent-Department, was not justified. The encashment five days later to the tune of ₹ 3 lacs, allegedly in discharge of the anticipated liability, as per the reply filed, cannot be appreciated, in any manner. The eagerness of the official-respondents to meet their targets at the end of the financial year, by following this method of recovery, cannot be approved. It is apparent, prima facie that such a huge liability has been made out against the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enquiry on the ground that there was no order against the petitioner and in the absence of the liability, the cheques could not be taken. 2. The pleaded case of the petitioner is that the petitioner-Firm is engaged in the business of supply of cigarette, biddi, pan masala etc. and duly registered under the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, the 'PVAT') and was not a defaulter. It has been alleged that respondent No.3, Navjeet Singh, the Excise Taxation Officer, Mobile Wing, Ludhiana, who has been impleaded in his personal capacity, came to his premises on 16.02.2015 and threatened him and demanded exorbitant amounts with the help of police. The cheques in question amounting to ₹ 3 lacs each were taken despite t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were pointed out and the plea taken was that the cheques were submitted voluntarily at the time of inspection. Thereafter, one of the cheque was encashed with full knowledge as the petitioner had desired to discharge his anticipated liability in parts. Notice had been issued to the petitioner for provisional assessment of the income under the PVAT Act. 4. At the time of arguments on 30.06.2015, counsel for the State had placed on record the provisional assessment order, passed on 26.06.2015 by one Manmohan Singh, Excise Taxation Officer, Mobile Wing, Ludhiana, whereby a sum of ₹ 11,20,281/- has been assessed as provisional assessment, without prejudice to the outcome of the present writ petition and the sum of ₹ 3 lacs, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no stay. 6. On 09.06.2015, permission was taken by respondent No.3, firstly, for entrusting the proceedings to some other officer which was granted and one Manmohan Singh, Excise Taxation Officer, Mobile Wing, Ludhiana was entrusted with the said file. Thereafter, permission was taken from respondent No.2 to frame provisional assessment on the same date, i.e., 09.06.2015. The said officer, thereafter, issued notice for 17.06.2015 and noticed that written reply has been received but none had appeared despite numerous opportunities given and the Proprietor was wilfully avoiding appearance. Accordingly, the judgment was reserved on 17.06.2015 and as noticed above, the provisional assessment was framed and accordingly, a demand o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , in accordance with law. The said order, though not specifically challenged, has apparently been passed to spite the petitioner and is necessarily to be quashed. Accordingly, the provisional assessment order dated 26.06.2015 is hereby quashed. 9. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed by directing that the respondents shall refund a sum of ₹ 3,10,000/-, within a period of one week from the receipt of a certified copy of this order and a sum of ₹ 10,000/- shall be recovered from respondent No.3, by the State, for his arbitrary action. The cheque bearing No.053462 amounting to ₹ 3 lacs shall also be returned to the petitioner. However, to safeguard the interests of the Revenue, the petitioner shall maintain a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
