Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1101 (MAD)

Jaya Pathanjali Fire Works, Rep. by its Proprietor M. Soundarraj v. Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement), Enforcement Group, Kovilpatti, Tuticorin District

2016-03-14

B.RAJENDRAN

body2016
ORDER : 1. The only ground of the petitioner is that at the time of inspection, the petitioner was coerced to part with the cheque for the alleged sales tax due and when the authorities have no power to collect tax and since assessment is not made, the collection of tax by way of getting a cheque at the time of inspection, is illegal. 2. Even though during the course of inspection dated 22.12.2015, two cheques were collected from the petitioner and till date, even according to the petitioner, they have not been encashed. In this connection, even as per the Circular No.7/2014 dated 03.02.2014, the Inspecting authority is prohibited to collect the tax at the time of inspection. Therefore, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that such course is not open to the authority. 3. Whereas the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that they have volunteered, they have agreed and they accepted and thereafter, to show their bona fide, they offered. Therefore, there is nothing wrong on the part of the authorities. He further submitted that the collecting of tax is only on the basis of records and it is not a coercive collection. 4. However, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court that the issue involved in this writ petition is covered by the decision of this Court reported in M/s. Astek Electricals and Controls Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (CT), The Commercial Tax Officer Enforcement and the Branch Manager, Canara Bank reported in (2014) 67 VST 321 (Mad). 5. Following the decision cited above, this Court is of the view that such collection is invalid. Even otherwise, they have not chosen to deposit the cheques and it is clearly proved that there is no amount to be returned. Of course, the petitioner is a bona fide person to pay tax on demand independently. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to return the cheques bearing Nos. 926621 & 926622 dated 22.12.2015 to the petitioner within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, as the respondents and their officials do not have any power or authority to collect the cheques at the time of inspection of the premises of an assessee. 926621 & 926622 dated 22.12.2015 to the petitioner within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, as the respondents and their officials do not have any power or authority to collect the cheques at the time of inspection of the premises of an assessee. It is always open to the Assessing Authority to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. No costs.