IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH HIGH COURT DIVISION

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

Writ Petition No. 8918 of 2019 In the matter of:

An application under article 102 of the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh

-And-

In the matter of: A-One Polymer Limited

...Petitioner -Versus-

Government of Bangladesh and others

... Respondents Ms. Nahid Mahtab, Senior Advocate with

Ms. Sonia Sarder, Advocate

... For the petitioner Mr. Pratikar Chakma, DAG with

Mr. Humayun Kabir,

Ms. Farzana Rahman Shampa,

Mr. Masud Rana Mohammad Hafiz and,

Mr. Ali Akbor Khan, AAGs

... For respondent No.3 Judgment on: 07.02.2024

Present

Mr. Justice Muhammad Khurshid Alam Sarkar

And

Mr. Justice Sardar Md. Rashed Jahangir

Sardar Md. Rashed Jahangir, J:

The Rule was issued on an application under article 102 of

the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh calling

upon the respondents to show cause as to why the notice and

demand of VAT of Tk.20,02,57,954/-(Twenty crore two lac fifty

seven thousand nine hundred fifty four) for the period from

January, 2015 to March, 2018 under Nothi No. Y¡L¡ Ešl/BxJ¢hx/H

Ju¡e f¢mj¡l/j§pL gy¡¢L/10(195)/2019/1286, a¡¢lMx 29/5/2019 ¢MËx (Annexure-‘B-1’) issued by the respondent No. 5 on the basis of purported report (copy of which was not supplied to the petitioner)

of VAT Evasion Case No. 17/2019, dated 07.01.2019 should not be

declared to have been issued without lawful authority and are of no

legal effect and/or such other or further order or orders passed as to

this Court may seem fit and proper.

The petitioner is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1994 engaged in manufacturing uPVC Pipes & Fittings, Teflon Tape, ABS Bathroom Fittings, Magic Pipe, Toilet Tissue Holder etc. and having been registered under section 15 of the Value Added Tax Act, 1991 ( in short ‘the VAT Act’) for the purpose of paying VAT. It is stated that on 15.05.2018 the respondents entered into the Head Office of the petitioner-company for the purpose of conducting inspection and search under section 26 of the VAT Act, 1991 pursuant to a letter of authority dated 14.05.2018 issued by the office of the respondent No. 3, and after such search and inspection as aforementioned the inspecting team seized some documents and materials relating to VAT payment including commercial and personal documents also upon preparing Mushak-5 for the purpose of preparing and submitting a report before the concern authority for enabling them to collect or realise proper VAT. It is further stated that on 03.01.2019, the office of respondent No. 3 submitted a report to the Convener of the Task Force constituted for the purpose of auditing payment of VAT and intelligence services and on the basis of said report respondent No. 5 issued and served a notice upon the petitioner purportedly under section 55(1) of the VAT Act asking it to show cause as to why it

Ms. Nahid Mahtab, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the show cause-cum-demand notice dated 29.05.2019 issued solely on the basis of a report dated 17.01.2019 prepared in violation of the provisions of sections 26, 26(1)(ka), 26(Ka)(3) and (4), 48 and 51 of the VAT Act, 1991.

She next submits that the respondents violating the provisions of the VAT Act illegally entered into the office premises of the petitioner and seized as well as 10(ten) documents including CPU, Laptop, Computer Software and C.D., collected from the IT room of the petitioner without having any valid authority under the VAT Act or Rules made thereunder and therefore, the issuance and service of the impugned notice p