Back
2001 Supreme(SC) 1480
Supreme Court of India
G. B. PATTANAIK, RUMA PAL AND P. VENKATARAMA REDDI
Ramesh Chawla
Versus
Commissioner of Sales Tax and Others
Civil Appeal No. 7306 of 2001 With Civil Appeals Nos. 7307 to 7309 of 2001
Decided on: 19-10-2001
Suresh Srivastava, H.K. Puri, S.K. Puri, Rajesh Shriuastava, U. Bannerjee, Anindata Gupta, Advocates, Kailash Vasudeu, K.C. Kaushik, D.S. Mehra, Advocates.
Non-availability and non-printing of relevant forms relieved vehicles from the obligation of carrying those forms and prevented their detention.
Headnote:
Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 - Forms - Obligation of carrying forms with the vehicle and detention of vehicle - Relevant forms not printed or made available - Appeals allowed
Fact of the Case:
The appeals were filed alleging that the forms prescribed under section 64 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975, meant to be carried by truck-owners, were not printed or made available by the prescribed authority.
Finding of the Court:
The court assumed the assertions made in the petitions to be true since the relevant forms were not available and had not been printed. It held that the vehicles in question could not have the obligation of carrying those forms with the vehicle nor could be detained for not carrying the forms.
Issues: Allegations of forms not being printed or made available, obligation of carrying forms, and detention of vehicles without the forms.
Ratio Decidendi: Relevant forms not being available or printed relieved the vehicles from the obligation of carrying those forms and prevented their detention for not carrying the forms.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, and the court directed that its decision would remain operative until the forms in question were printed or made available.
Judgment
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals have been filed making allegations that the forms prescribed under section 64 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 which are meant to be carried by the truck-owners, have not been printed nor made available by the prescribed authority and therefore the vehicle without the said forms could not have been detained. Though sufficient opportunity had been given to the Delhi Commissioner of Sales Tax and others in Delhi State and an affidavit has been filed, but, in that affidavit this assertion has not been denied.
3. In that view of the matter, we assume that the assertions made in the petitions are true. Since the relevant forms are not available and have not been printed, the vehicles in question cannot have the obligation of carrying those forms with the vehicle nor the vehicle could be detained for not carrying the forms in question. These appeals are accordingly allowed. We make it clear that this direction of ours will remain operative so long as the forms in question are not printed or made available. The Government may take steps for printing the forms and making them available.
Appeals allowed.
