Case Law Details
Associated Power Structures Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court)
Well, the stand taken by the officer is quite fair, but we only fail to understand as to why the officer did not apply his mind at the time of passing of the impugned order. It is only when this Court pointed out the difference, wide enough for anyone to notice in imposing the amount of penalty, did the officer realizing his mistake, agreed to rectify the same. We only caution the officer to be careful in future and not commit such mistake again, for such type of mistake not only causes harassment to the parties but also shatters faith of the people in the system. Illustratively, as against the original demand of Rs. 11 crores, the officer while reviewing his own order reduced it to 18 lacs and in another case from 8 crores to 2.8 crores.
The Assessing Authority shall decide the case on merits expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of appearance of the petitioner; The Assessing Authority shall pass a speaking order assigning reasons, copy whereof shall be supplied to the parties; If it is ultimately found that the petitioner’s deposit is in excess, the same shall be refunded within two months from the date of passing of the order; We also direct for de-freezing/de-attaching of the bank account(s) of the writ-petitioner, if attached in reference to the proceedings, subject matter of present petition. This shall be done immediately.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PATNA HIGH COURT
Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Govt official should penalized for wrong allegations & harassments in all such cases. So that it will be lesson to all officials in Govt Sector.
Only Caution???
when it comes to assessee; they need to be superhuman being as no provision of rectification &/or revision is there and for even a petty mistake be it of typographical or ignorance, the assessees are thieves and for the order, clearly passed for extorting money from the assessee by the assessing officer, just a caution advise.
Kudos to court and judicial immunity
Even during training period 1979 -1982 we (my self, my principal and colleagues) felt highhandedness of government officers, in raising huge demands, pressing for forceful recovery, threatening voices to attach account to close down business etc. were common. These are still common whenever many of government officers particularly of tax department have interaction and authority to harras. To avoid this all work must be based on written submissions, officer/ Tribunal / Court must be responsible to read written submissions carefully and apply mind properly. Otherwise even in duly heard cases deliberate ignoring of facts, contentions, grounds will continue. Principal of natural justice will be denied and litigation will take place – benefiting only litigation managers and professionals ( advocates, CA, CS etc) at cost of public money. Government counsels must also be made accountable if they advise on apparently futile litigation or unnecessary litigation..
My suggestion is that an order for suspension of concern should be issued.When it comes to tax payer he is not spared,then why the officer should be spared?I appeal to all the companies to come forward and file s case against the officer the matter should be dealt very strictly whomsoever he maybe should’ve severely punished.
there should be accountability of the concerned officers and highers up. The case to High court should not go if the error in judgement is realized or pointed out by Seniors to AO.
As long as HC do not penalize the Officer for abuse or gross negligence such observations by HC are meaningless.
If dealer is abusive or negligent, he is penalized and even prosecuted some cases.