SARAVANAN Vs. ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is Accused No.2 in C.C.Nos.301, 339, 340 of 2008 and 9 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Puducherry. The said calendar cases were instituted on four different complaints filed under Section 190(1) of Cr.P.C. alleging tax evasions which were punishable under the provisions of the Puducherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967 r/w Puducherry Value Added Tax Ac, 2007. Pending cases, the petitioner filed applications seeking to discharge him from the charges. The learned Magistrate by an individual order dated 15.09.2012 refused to discharge the petitioner from the charges and dismissed all his applications . It is this order now under challenge in this revision case.

(2.) The case of the complainant/1st respondent herein in C.C.No.301 of 2008 in brief is as follows:- There are totally three accused in the case. A1 is a partnership firm. A2 and A3 are partners of the firm. The petitioner is A2. They were running the business of resale of petrol, diesel and lubricant oil, etc. A1 firm has been registered under The Pondicherry General Sales Tax Act, 1967 and deemed to be a registered dealer under The Pondicherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007. According to the complainant, based on an intelligence tip off, when the officials of the department compared the sales data made available by the Indian Oil Corporation with the sales turnover submitted by A1 firm, the authorities found that there were a large scale tax evasion on the part of the accused. The assessing authority doubted the correctness and completeness of the returns filed by the accused, therefore issued a pre assessment notice to the accused on 30.06.2007 which was served on 30.06.2007 jointly and severally on A1 to A3. Despite sufficient opportunities, the accused did not come forward with any objection to the pre assessment notice and therefore, the assessing authority issued second notice dated 04.10.2007. But, there was no response from the accused. Therefore, the assessing authority after following the due procedures, completed the assessment; passed an order of assessment dated 28.11.2007 and issued demand and penalty notices whereby the accused were required to pay a sum of Rs.12954404/- as tax and a sum of Rs.12765152/- as penalty.

(3.) Likewise, the assessing authority found that the accused reported incorrect sales turn over details and there were tax evasions on the part of the accused by suppressing the actual sales turnover during the financial year 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004 also. Hence, the assessing authority initiated separate proceedings and on failure of the accused to pay the tax and penalty separate complaints have been filed. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences and issued summons to all the accused. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate framed charges. The accused denied the charges and they opted for trial. Accordingly, the cases were posted for trial.