Satish Kumar Mittal, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, who is carrying on transport business, has filed this petition under article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refund a sum of Rs. 80,000 which was charged from him as penalty under Section 14B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for short, "the Act") and which was deposited by him on August 30, 2001 vide annexure P1.
(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that in high handedness Sh. S. P. Kansal, Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, U.T. Chandigarh, intercepted the truck of the petitioner at barrier on August 24, 2001 which was carrying the goods of the traders, and a penalty of Rs. 80,000 was illegally imposed for carrying those consignment, without the proper documents. Because the petitioner was to get his truck released, he deposited amount of Rs. 80,000 on August 30, 2001 under the compelling circumstances, as the vehicle remained detained continuously for six days. Subsequently, the petitioner requested to the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, vide application dated October 10, 2001 for supplying the copy of the penalty order. Admittedly, the said order was not supplied to the petitioner. In absence of the penalty order, the petitioner challenged the illegal and arbitrary action of the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, U.T., Chandigarh under Section 20 of the said Act before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, U.T. Chandigarh. The appeal filed by the petitioner was finally heard and on June 2, 2002 the Appellate Authority allowed the said appeal and the penalty order was set aside and the case was remanded to the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, U.T. Chandigarh for passing a fresh order in accordance with law after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Undisputedly the said order passed by the Appellate Authority has also not been supplied to the petitioner till date nor the amount of Rs. 80,000 was refunded to him which was illegally and arbitrarily collected and retained even after setting aside the penalty order. After remission of the case, the petitioner made several representations but till date no fresh order has been passed regarding the penalty. The amount of Rs. 80,000 has also not been refunded to the petitioner.
(3.) COUNSEL for the respondents has filed a short reply admitting that a penalty of Rs. 80,000 was imposed by the then Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner which was got deposited by the petitioner with the department and that said amount is still lying deposited. It has been further stated that neither the file of the Appellate Authority nor the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner are available with the department. It has been stated that when the case was remanded and, the file which was received from the office of the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, U.T. Chandigarh was not returned. But it has not been satisfactorily explained why the file of the Appellate Authority is not available in the office of the Appellate Authority. It is an undisputed position that till date copies of appellate order as well as order passed by the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner have not been supplied to the petitioner nor after the remand any fresh order has been passed.;