9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... njab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, `2005 Act') as also under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short, `1956 Act'). It is manufacturing and trading in plywood, particle board, flush doors, table tops, veneer etc. with liability to pay the tax with effect from 20.10.2004. It had filed all the four quarterly returns for the year 2012-13. Its business premises was inspected by the respondents on 22.5.2012. One production register, bundle of papers related to production and some loose papers were impounded for verification. On 23.5.2012, a notice was served upon the petitioner for the verification of documents. In pursuance thereof, its proprietor appeared and requested the concerned Officer to return the impounded documents so as to enab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er argued that section 46(3) of 2005 Act makes it obligatory on the officer not to retain the current account books for more than 30 days and old account books for more than 60 days. Hence, the respondents after the expiry of the aforesaid period were bound to return the impounded documents or to supply the photocopies thereof to the petitioner. Despite the above mandate, respondent No.2 neither returned the documents nor provided the copies thereof and thus, acted beyond the statute exceeding his jurisdiction. The impugned order dated 12.6.2015 passed by the respondents without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to explain was in violation of the principles of natural justice. Even otherwise, the same has been passed without applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... concerned Officer of the respondents ought to have supplied the copies of the impounded documents, before asking the petitioner to submit its reply and to explain the same. In view of the above factual position, the impugned order (Annexure P.2) has been passed by the concerned Officer without affording proper opportunity to the petitioner in violation of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the order dated 12.6.2015 (Annexure P.2) is quashed. The matter is remitted back to the assessing authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. Since the petitioner has a right to take the copies of the impounded documents, as period of 60 days has already expired, therefore, the concerned Officer of the respondents is directed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
