A Delhi court has warned Service Tax department against filing "frivolous" and "vexatious" petitions against individuals and wasting the precious time of court and money of common people.
Additional Sessions Judge Lokesh Kumar Sharma pulled up the department while rejecting its revision petition filed against the order of the magisterial court and said "heavy penalties shall be imposed" in future if it repeats its act.
In its order the magisterial court had allowed Surender Pal Singh Chadha to deposit Rs seven lakh surety amount against its previous order of Rs eight lakh for failing to produce an accused in service tax matter for whom he had stood surety to secure his bail. The department had appealed against the magisterial court order reducing the surety amount.
"I would like to observe my anguish and serious concern over the petitioner's (Department of Service Tax) over anxious behaviour in moving frequently to higher courts on trivial and frivolous issues. "The petitioner had eventually forgotten that it is not a functionary of the state rather it is the state itself and by filing such frivolous and vexations petitions, the precious time of the court and money of the common people of the nation had been wasted," the judge said.
In its order, however, sessions court refrained itself from imposing a cost on Department of Service Tax while warning it not to indulge in similar acts.
"Though on this action of the petitioner, I am refraining myself from imposing costs upon the petitioner. However, the petitioner is warned to refrain itself from involving in such litigations with the individuals in future failing which heavy penalties shall be imposed upon it," the court said.
"I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate," it said, noting that magistrate has powers to remit portion of penalty under the bond even after passing the final order and before recovery of total amount.
Chadha had stood surety for Rs 10 lakh for securing bail of a man who had allegedly evaded service tax worth Rs nine crore. However, since the accused had later absconded and Chadha was not in a position to produce him before court, he had offered to deposit the surety amount as a penalty and had prayed for some leniency to be shown towards him because of his old age and being nonearning.
The magistrate, thereafter, directed Chadha to deposit a penalty of Rs 8 lakh instead of Rs 10 lakh but he deposited Rs 5 lakh and sought some time to deposit rest of the amount. However, Chadha again prayed for leniency saying he can deposit only two lakh more, which the court allowed. Aggrieved by this, the department had challenged the order of reduction of surety amount before the sessions court.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}