POORNA WINES Vs. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner -dealer in this writ petition has assailed the competence and authority of the action of the 2nd respondent in demanding and collecting an amount of Rs. 17,89,695/ - by way of three cheques bearing Nos. 0375338, 0375339 and 0375340 towards the alleged sales tax liability of the petitioner relating to assessment years 1990 -91, 1991 -1992 and 1992 -1993 by seeking a writ of mandamus. Although many facts are pleaded in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, for the purpose of disposing of this writ petition, there is no necessity for us to deal with all those facts. Suffice it to state that the 2nd respondent admittedly collected the sales tax of Rs. 17,89,695/ - by way of the aforementioned three cheques before determining the sales tax liability of the petitioner -dealer for the assessment years 1990 -91, 1991 -92 and 1992 -93 as envisaged under the APGST Act. It stated that on 29.9.1993 the 2nd respondent coerced the petitioner to pay the tax and obtained three cheques bearing Nos. 0375338 for Rs. 13,35,146/ -, 0375339 for Rs. 3,30,900/ - and 0375340 for Rs. 1,23,649/ - drawn on Dena Bank, Vijayawada. The said cheques were returned by the bank on 28.9.1993 on the ground that the power given to the signatory to sign the cheques was revoked. According to the petitioner again in substitution of the earlier cheques, three more cheques for the same value were secured from the petitioner in the Police Station at 22.00 hours on 30.10.1993 and those cheques were realised and an amount of Rs. 17,89,695/ - was collected and credited to the account of Commercial Department towards the sales tax liability of the petitioner -dealer. So alleging the petitioner has prayed for the relief, which reads as under.

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the action of the respondents in collecting the sales tax by coercing the petitioner to issue cheques on 29.9.1993 and 30.10.1993 ex facie is one without jurisdiction, illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are duty bound to refund the sum money recovered from the petitioner towards the sales tax liability even before determining the tax liability. Opposing the writ petition, the respondents have filed counter.

(3.) SRI Murthy learned counsel for the petitioner has not contested the correctness of the statement made by the learned Special G.P. for Taxes that the assessments are completed for the aforementioned assessment years. However, he would contend that on account of the illegal act on the part of the 2nd respondent committed on 29.9.1993 and 30.10.1993, the petitioner -dealer was subjected to avoidable litigation as well as facing prosecution for the alleged dishonour of the cheques issued by an unauthorized person on behalf of the petitioner firm on 30.9.1993 and therefore, it is a fit case where the Court should declare that the impugned action of the 2nd respondent is one without authority of law and illegal. It is true that the authorities under the APGST Act cannot demand tax without determining the sales tax liability of the dealers. Here is a case where the 2nd respondent without there being any determination of the sales tax liability for the assessment years 1990 -91, 1991 -92 and 1992 -93 highhandedly and without any authority of law obtained the cheques from the petitioner -dealer and on account of that illegal action, the petitioner came to be prosecuted for the alleged dishonour of the cheques and also avoidable litigation before this Court by way of this writ petition.