RAJU S/O VENKAPPA CHOPADE Vs. JAGANATH TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the petitioner's counsel and also the respondent's counsel.

(2.) The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant i.e. the respondent herein has filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. invoking Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and cognizance was taken and thereafter the complainant also examined as PW.1 and he was cross-examined. The petitioner, who is the accused before the Court below has also led his evidence and filed an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. summoning the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax contending that the complainant has produced sale returns from April-2016 to March-2017. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax is an expert to explain the procedure for submitting the returns and also he is an expert to explain regarding the deficiency, mistakes, false filing or is there any illegal sale transaction in the business of the concerned registered dealer. Hence, the evidence of the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax is very much essential to explain the above said things by referring the return submitted by the complainant for the period from April-2016 to March-2017 and hence he may be summoned. The said application was resisted by the respondent herein contending that already the complainant has produced the sales tax returns pertaining to April-2016 to March-2017 in order to show the transaction between the complainant and the accused and the case is pertaining to dishonour of cheque issued by the accused to the complainant in the course of transaction towards the material purchased by him. There is no question of submitting sales tax or commercial tax in the present case. Section 138 of N.I. Act does not attract these questions and hence the application is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) The other contention that the complainant is a registered Firm and carrying on business since many years. The filing of the sales tax and commercial tax and other taxes is to be questioned by the concerned Authorities and if the sales tax returns filed by the complainant is not correct or is showing any deficiency, then there are concerned Authorities to question the same and to take further action and hence the evidence of the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxis not having any bearing on this matter and hence prayed Court to dismiss the application. The Court below after considering both the application as well as the objections, has rejected the application.