Case Law Details
Maruti Castings, Proprietor Nand Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)
Prima facie it cannot be said that in case of a registered person action only under Section 35(6) read with Section 73 or 74 of the Act can be taken and that Section 67 of the Act cannot be invoked, if the circumstances as indicated therein exist.
The word ‘secreted’ is not defined under the Act, however, the same can be understood to mean anything which is concealed and in those circumstances even if the documents are not kept at the designated places where the same ought to be kept in terms of the Act and the Rules, and in case circumstances exist where the absence of the documents is with an intention to conceal them from the officers, the same can be termed as secreted, therefore, as observed hereinbefore, the plea raised in this regard, based on the circumstances which have come on record, is essentially premature.
Consequently, at this stage, prima facie it cannot be said that the seizure is illegal for the purpose of coming to the conclusion that provisions of Section 67(6) of the Act would have no application.
The plea raised regarding lack of jurisdiction also apparently cannot be countenanced while dealing with the application seeking vacation/modification of the interim order.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
