9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1725X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Official, that is not the subject-matter of the present writ petition. Therefore, even if a complaint is filed against any official of the Commercial Taxes Department as well, that too, also cannot be the matter of investigation under the writ jurisdiction. Petition disposed off. - WRIT PETITION No.26717/2017 (T-RES) - - - Dated:- 11-9-2017 - DR. VINEET KOTHARI, J. B. A. Belliappa for the petitioner. T. K. Vedamurthy, Additional Government Advocate, for the Respondents. ORDER Heard the prolonged arguments on both sides. 2. This court is satisfied that with the proceedings undertaken by the concerned authority of the respondent-Commercial Taxes Department for reassessment based on intelligence report of the Customs Authorities, commencing from the survey proceedings undertaken at the business premises of the petitioner under section 52 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, appears to be in order and upon due assignment of authorization of the concerned Additional Commissioner in favour of the Assistant Commissioner. 3. The present petition is filed by the petitioner under article 226 of the Constitution of India, therefore does not brook any f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the respondent-Department takes place in the aforesaid manner. With due assignment, different proceedings under the Act including the proceedings of search and survey under section 52 of the Act were undertaken in the present case. 10. He has also brought to the notice of the court annexure R10 dated 16th August, 2016 signed by Mr. D. Anil, Additional Commissioner of Customs, A and ACC Customs Commissionerate, a letter addressed to the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement) seeking information of details of imports made by the petitioner-assessee under IEC-0710001134 through Bengaluru Air Cargo Complex from the date of registration till date was furnished in soft form in the CD. It is also informed that the records relied upon in the notice have been returned back to the petitioner on 27th July, 2016. On the basis of aforesaid documents, learned counsel for the respondent has sought to contend that the proceedings undertaken against the petitioner-assessee right from 1st July, 2016 commencing from the survey conducted at the business place of the petitioner, are being carried out in orderly and legal manner and therefore, the present petition filed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bove, we find that in order to instill confidence in the enquiry, if the work is entrusted to any other officer of the rank of Additional Commissioner of Customs, no prejudice would be caused since the enquiry even otherwise is directed to be held as per the observations made by the learned single judge in the impugned order. Hence, we direct the Chief Commissioner of Customs, Bengaluru, to look into the matter and assign the work of holding of enquiry to any other officer of the rank of Additional Commissioner of Customs (other than the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Airport who passed the order for suspension of out of charge order of the goods). 7. It is also clarified that the officer who may hold the enquiry shall not be influenced by the order dated 16th February, 2016 (annexure P) and he shall independently consider the matter in accordance with law on the basis of the material available before him after giving an opportunity of hearing both sides. 8. We also direct that the appellant shall co-operate with the enquiry proceedings. The nomination of the officer shall be completed by the Chief Commissioner of Customs within a period of two weeks from the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es according to the learned counsel for the petitioner and since the Division Bench of this court, upon the concession of the learned counsel for the respondent-Customs Department Mr. Neeralgi that they have no objection to assign the work to any other Additional Commissioner of Customs, thought it appropriate to instill confidence and fairness in the enquiry and directed the change of concerned Additional Commissioner of Customs before whom the petitioner also undertook to co-operate in the enquiry. Without going into allegations and without mentioning even the name of Mr. D. Anil, Assistant Commissioner, as indicated in the order passed by the Division Bench, this court at the present stage cannot draw inference that merely because Mr. D. Anil, vide annexure R10 forwarded the information with regard to said imports of electronic goods made by the petitioner to the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Department (Enforcement) South Zone, Bengaluru, therefore, the said proceedings should fall to the ground. Nothing beyond change of enquiry from that officer to another officer under the directives of the Division Bench of this court in the order dated 23rd April, 2016, upon a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
