N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J

1. The Accounts Officer (Bills), BSNL, Kannur, who is arrayed as accused in S.T. No.544/2007 of JFCM, Payyannur, is the petitioner. This petition is filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash Annexure A-6 complaint. In Annexure A-6 complaint, the complainant – Kunhimangalam Grama Panchayat has alleged that the accused failed to pay Professional Tax for the year 2006-07. The total amount payable was shown to be Rs.2,500/-. It was mentioned that the Professional Tax was assessed taking into account the total business turnover of the two telephone exchanges situated within the limits of that Grama Panchayat. The petitioner -BSNL contends that BSNL is a company wholly owned by the Government of India and that the main function of BSNL is to provide basic telephones, mobile service connection, internet connections and other allied services. It is further contended that all those services are done through the telephone exchanges and towers constructed by the BSNL. It is not disputed that there are various telephone exchanges throughout the State.

2. According to the petitioner, the BSNL is not doing any business but only renders service to the subscribers and no buying, making, manufacturing, exporting or importing is done by the BSNL in the telephone exchanges within the jurisdiction of the complainant-Panchayat. According to the accused, the BSNL is only collecting service taxes from the subscribers and these service taxes so collected are paid to the Government of India. Hence, according to the petitioner Annexrue A-6 complaint filed against the petitioner for the alleged non payment of professional tax is an abuse of process of court, for, according to the petitioner the BSNL is not liable to pay professional tax.

3. Section 204 of Kerala Pachayat Raj Act, 1994, deals with the collection of professional tax. It reads:

"(1) The profession tax shall, subject to such rules as may be prescribed be levied every half year in every Village Panchayat area on :-

(i) every company which transacts business in such Panchayat area for not less then sixty days in the aggregate in that half year and

(ii) every person who, in that half year-

(a) exercise a profession, art or calling, or transacts business or holds any appointment, public or private-

(i) within such Panchayat area for not less than sixty days in the aggregate, or

(ii) outside such Panchayat area but who resides in it for not less than sixty days in the aggregate, or

(b) resides in such Panchayat area for not less than sixty days in the aggregate and is in receipt of any income from investments.

(2) The profession tax shall be levied at such rates as may be fixed by the Village Panchayat not exceeding the maximum rates prescribed.

(3) A person shall be chargeable under the class appropriate to his aggregate income from all the surces specified in sub-section (1) as being liable to the tax."

(underlined by me to lay emphasis)

BSNL admittedly is a company. Therefore, the question for consideration is whether the BSNL, which is a company 'transacts business' within the area of the complainant-Panchayat.

4. The expression 'Transacts Business', as defined in Rule 2(c) of Kerala Panchayat Raj (Profession Tax) Rules, 1966 means:

"The doing of acts or business of whatever nature whether isolated or not, such as soliciting, obtaining or transmitting orders or buying, making, manufacturing, exporting, importing, receiving, transmitting or otherwise dealing with goods."

(underlined by me to lay emphasis)

Therefore, the crucial question for consideration is whether the BSNL is engaged in doing of acts or business or is otherwise dealing with goods.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the BSNL is not soliciting, obtaining or transmitting orders etc nor is it otherwise dealing with goods. But the learned counsel for the respondent-Panchayat submits that the telephone exchanges under the BSNL are transacting business by selling SIM Cards and also b