Sections 21 (2), 25A, 38 and 2 (23) Sales Tax Rules, 2006, RR 2 (5) and 5 (1) (C) dated 126 2004 Section RO 555 of Sales Tax General Order No. 2004 (I) / 2006, dated 5 6 2006 D, the jurisdiction of the registration was suspended from the date of registration of the registered person till the next order of the Commissioner Inland Revenue Taxpayers was held that the Sales Tax Act, 1990 21 was adopted without providing any reasonable opportunity. Hearings and even allegations were outside the scope of Section 21 of the Sales Tax Act 1990. The sample data obtained under Section 25A / 38 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 was without proper procedure of law. That the Commissioner's jurisdiction was challenged, but instead of resolving the jurisdiction issue, the Commissioner passed an illegal order under section 21 of the Sales Tax Act 1990 and without registering the opportunity to explain the charges filed 'S registration has been suspended. The show's notice; and the entire story of the order of suspension was based on faulty grounds and the taxpayer's right to record the facts was with the taxpayer. The taxpayer's request referred to both addresses that were not properly appreciated in the facts of his manufacturing unit as the Commissioner's scope of general order number 3 of 2004 was very limited where the manufacturing unit / office was not known. But there was none. The dispute arose in this case when the department could initiate proceedings against tax evasion under Section 36 of the Sales Tax Act 1990, if there was any mention of the definition of office registered in Section 2 (33) of the Sales Tax Act 1990 This order could have been processed. And R (I) (c) of Sales Tax Rules 2006
