SREEDHARAN PILLAI Vs. ABDUL SAMAD AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal filed by V. Sreedharan Pillai, Head Clerk, Kottamkara Panchayat, Kundara, is directed against an order of acquittal passed by the Judicial Magistrate of II Class, Quilon, in a prosecution under Section 74 of the Kerala Panchayats Act read with Rule 26 of the Rules framed under the said Act, alleging that the accused, the first Respondent herein, wilfully defaulted to pay profession tax due to the panchayat for the assessment year 1974 -75.

(2.) IN support of the prosecution, P.W.1, the complainant, and P.W.2, the Bill Collector of the panchayat, were examined and assessment notices, demand notices and other documents including the authorisation letter (Ext. P -1) were marked and proved on the side of the prosecution.

(3.) THE learned Magistrate on a consideration of the entire evidence found that the bill for profession tax as provided under Rule 13 of the Rules has been served in the case on hand, that there was no necessity for service of bill under Rule 2 of the Taxation and Appeal Rules, that notice of the assessment of tax was given to the first Respondent, that the demand notice of the profession tax was received by the first Respondent as evidenced by Ext. P -5 acknowledgment, that even though several notices were issued to the first Respondent he has not raised any objection stating that he was not conducting any business, that the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 and Exts. P -2 to P -12 establish that the first Respondent was conducting business and that he has defaulted payment of profession tax. But on the ground that Ext. P -1 authorisation is invalid under law, the trial court found that the complainant P.W.1 was incompetent to file the complaint and that the complaint was therefore not maintainable.