Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kishore Dua vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 March, 2015
(1)
W.P. No.18417/2014
17.03.2015
Shri A.K. Shrivastava with Shri Sapan Usrete,
Advocates for the petitioner.
Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, Govt. Advocate for
the respondents/State.
Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate for the respondent No.5.
Heard counsel for the parties for admission. This petition is filed as Public Interest Litigation, essentially, pointing out the inaction of the concerned Authorities in collection of Value Added Tax, which is required to be deducted at source in respect of goods such as oil, diesel, Gitti, Murram, sand etc. The petitioner has relied on specific cases in Annexure P-1 from pages 15 to 74. On bare perusal of these documents, it is obvious that necessary deductions at source have not been done by the concerned Dealer. According to the petitioner, even though these specific cases have been brought to the notice of the Appropriate Authority, no follow up action has been taken much less to initiate appropriate proceedings and take it to its logical end for evasion of tax.
The respondents have filed reply-affidavit denying (2) the allegation in the petition that no action has been taken by the concerned Authority. However, according to the petitioner, the reply-affidavit does not specifically counter the specific illustrations pointed out by the petitioner in Annexure P-1 and does not offer any comment in that behalf.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in addition to these specific cases, the petitioner is in possession of several other documents/invoices in respect of other traders for the relevant period.
Considering the above, we are inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Indore to initiate appropriate proceedings against the specific cases highlighted by the petitioner in Annexure P-1 and any other additional cases to be brought to his (respondent No.2) notice by the petitioner or any other interested person and to proceed against the tax evaders with utmost dispatch by resorting to proceedings, as may be permissible in law.
The respondent No.2 shall take steps, as may be advised, against the specific cases brought to his notice within six weeks from the date of receipt of representation from the petitioner or any other interested person and proceed against the concerned persons, in accordance with law, expeditiously. Besides (3) this, nothing more is required to be said in this petition. Indeed, if the respondent No.2 fails to perform his duties as per law, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the superior Authority - Principal Secretary, Commercial Tax Department, Government of Madhya Pradesh to point out the inaction of the respondent No.2, in which case the Principal Secretary shall take appropriate action, as may be advised, including to proceed personally against the incumbent Commissioner of Commercial Tax for his failure to act and respond with utmost dispatch being a case of dereliction of duty. A strict regime in this behalf must be evolved and follow up actions taken up by all the duty holders.
Considering the fact that non collection of amount towards the Value Added Tax would be nothing short of loss caused to the public exchequer and the officers failing to do so would be contributing to that malaise, which ought to be eschewed.
Petition disposed of accordingly.
(A. M. Khanwilkar) (Alok Aradhe)
Chief Justice Judge
psm