CROMPTON GREAVES LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF TAXES ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER No. 1 is a limited company and deals in sale and supply of pump sets. It has a branch at Guwahati. The petitioner-company is a registered dealer under the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1956, with the Superintendent of Taxes, Unit-C at Guwahati. The goods, namely, pump sets, sold by the petitioner-company being item falling under item No. 47, namely, "all machineries and spare parts thereof" to the Schedule of taxable goods attached to the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1956, petitioner-company paid the taxes at the rate of 7 per cent in a rupee. The respondent No. 4 after examination of the accounts assessed the petitioner-company for the periods ending March 31, 1987. The respondent No. 3 issued a notice under section 31(1) of the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) Act asking the petitioner-company to produce the accounts mentioned in the said notice for the last 8 (eight) years on February 19, 1990, for verification of purchase and sale of monoblock pump sets.

(2.) THE petitioner-company moved a revision application before the Assistant Commissioner of Taxes challenging the aforesaid notice dated February 17, 1990. The respondent No. 1 admitted the application and stayed the operation of the impugned notice on October 13, 1990, the respondent No. 5, namely, the Superintendent of Taxes, attached to the Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offence), Assam, Rehabari, Guwahati, visited the business premises of the petitioner-company along with the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offence), Guwahati and served a notice under section 31(1) of the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1956 directing the petitioner-company to produce the accounts, documents and other relevant papers relating to the purchase/sale of electrically operated pump sets on the same day and at the same time, the books of account were seized by the respondent No. 5 in the purported exercise of power under section 31(1) of the aforesaid Act. Books of account were seized by the respondent No. 5 in the purported exercise of power under section 31(3) of the Act and to that effect a seizure list also was served. A revision application was filed before the respondent No. 1 and the aforesaid application was admitted and all further proceedings in the matter were stayed. The revision application was heard finally by the Joint Commissioner of Taxes (respondent No. 2) and declared the seizure as well as the notice under section 31(1) of the Act to be illegal and quashed the notice dated October 17, 1990 and directed the respondent No. 5 to release all the seized books of account within 7 days. On February 26, 1991, the respondent No. 5, issued notice to the petitioner-company to collect all the seized books of account from the office of the Director, Bureau of Investigation (EO), Assam, Guwahati on February 29, 1991, at 11 a.m.

(3.) I have heard Dr. A. K. Saraf, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. B. P. Todi, learned counsel for the respondents. The following points are urged by Dr. Saraf :