VINOD KUMAR SHARMA Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER AGRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO orders sought to be quashed in this petition are annexures 6 and 7 to the petition, by which, a security of Rs. 27,060 in cash or through bank draft has been demanded. The petitioner's contention is that he had purchased a motor vehicle "tata 407 Model" from the State of Maharashtra and the same was being imported into the State of U. P. for his personal use. While checking at the time of entry, the vehicle was seized by the Sales Tax Officer, Agra on the ground that it was being imported for business purposes without necessary declaration and for want of forms XXXI/xxxii prescribed under the U. P. Sales Tax Act. On the aforesaid security being demanded, the petitioner made a representation before the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, Agra and by order dated 4th November, 1988 (annexure 6), security in the sum of Rs. 27,060 in cash or through bank draft was demanded. The petitioner thereafter made another application before the same authority for reviewing its earlier order but the same has been rejected by order annexure 7 on the ground that it had no power to review its own order. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in this petition. The order "annexure 7" has been rightly passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, Agra, as obviously, he had no power to review his own order. As regards the first order annexure 6, it will be noticed that when any goods are imported in violation of the provisions of the Act a penalty up to 40 per cent of the value of the goods can be imposed. In this case, the authorities have demanded a security of only Rs. 27,060 although the vehicle was admittedly valued approximately at Rs. 1,64,000. Learned counsel for the petitioner then urged that the condition of giving security either in cash or by bank draft imposed by the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, Agra, was unreasonable as his vehicle had been purchased for private use. It was submitted that the authorities should have demanded some other kind of security. It was also submitted that the petitioner possesses agricultural land and that can constitute good security in this case. However, in our opinion, such a prayer can be addressed only to the concerned authorities and we hope that the authorities will take this into consideration if the petitioner makes a prayer before it. It will be for the authorities to be satisfied whether the security offered to be furnished by the petitioner was sufficient and adequate or not and will not insist that the security by way of cash or bank draft only should be submitted by the petitioner. In our opinion interest of justice would be served if the penalty proceedings are disposed of by the Sales Tax Officer within a period of one month of the presentation of a certified copy of this order by the petitioner before him. With these observations, the writ petition is disposal of. A certified copy of this order may be made available to the learned counsel for the parties on payment of requisite charges within three days. .