SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 1206

S.H.KAPADIA, B.SUDERSHAN REDDY
SALES TAX OFFICERS – Appellant
Versus
DUTTA TRADERS – Respondent


( 1 ) RESPONDENT is a wholesale dealer in biscuits of different brands under the provisions of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. On 14th October, 1999, goods were being unloaded from vehicle no. WB-24-A-0112 when the Investigating Officer of Vigilance wing, Balasore Division, found certain irregularity and, accordingly, the Sales Tax Officer (Vigilance), raised a sum of Rs. 32,592. 00 as tax and Rs. 54,320. 00 as penalty under Section 16-D of the Orissa sales Tax Act, 1947 (for short, the Act ).

( 2 ) THE main contention of the respondent is that the Sales Tax Officer (Vigilance)is not competent to make assessment under Section 16-D of the Act inasmuch as he is an officer under the control of Inspector General of Police (Vigilance) and has no power to make assessment.

( 3 ) UNDER notification dated 14th May, 1997, the Commissioner delegated his powers and duties under Section 16-D of the Act to the sale's Tax Officers and Inspectors of Sales Tax Department. The said notification was issued under Section 3 (3) of the Act. The notifications issued indicate officers by designation who have been conferred with the powers of the Commission.

( 4 ) BY a cr



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top