(1.) PRESENT petition is nothing but an attempt to harass the private respondents by dragging them in a meaningless controversy long settled even as per taxing authority under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act.
(2.) THIS is petitioners' second attempt before this Court seeking a direction that the assessments made by the sales tax authorities over the years under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act in case of M/s. Bharat Singh Ram Nath be opened since they are guilty of suppressing true facts and thus evaded their sales tax liabilities.
(3.) THE State of Haryana in its reply relying upon Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of Orissa [1983] 53 STC 315; AIR 1983 SC 603 has taken an objection that the petitioner has not availed the alternative remedy as provided under section 42 of the Act and on this account the petition is liable to be dismissed. Respondent-State contested the stand of petitioner that his father Munshi Lal was ever a partner or had any other status in the firm. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at a considerable length and perused the relevant documents referred to by him during his submissions. Taxing authority under Sales Tax Act have no grievance against respondent No. 2 - M/s. Bharat Singh Ram Nath whose sales tax assessments for the disputed years had long been finalised. As per record, i. e. , the registration certificate of the firm, Munshi Lal was never a partner of the firm - M/s. Bharat Singh Ram Nath. That was why petitioner had no locus standi to challenge the assessments made by the Assessing Authority of M/s. Bharat Singh Ram Nath either as a complainant or as a legal representative of this father yet the authorities chose to hear the petitioner and decided the matter in controversy by passing speaking orders. The petitioner earlier too assailed the correctness of the order passed by the Assessing Authority/sales Tax Tribunal. Haryana, by filing C. W. P. No. 1673 of 1982 which was decided on April 14, 1982. The order reads as :