IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.21004 of 2008 Date of decision: 15.12.2008 M/s Beri Cotton Industries. -----Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others. -----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.N. MITTAL Present:- Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate for the petitioner. ----- ORDER: The petitioner is a licensee under the provisions of Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 and is exigible to market fee under Section 23 thereof. The Market Committee alleged that the petitioner was in possession of some quantity of cotton which was not accounted for in the returns filed. Inspite of opportunity, the petitioner failed to rebut the allegation to show as to whom the said goods belonged and as to how the inference drawn was uncalled for. Accordingly, assessment was made. Even in appeal, the petitioner failed to produce any material, which may rebut the allegation. The assessment order was affirmed by the appellate authority. The same C.W.P. No.21004 of 2008 has, thereafter, been affirmed by the revisional authority. The findings of the revisional authority are as under:- “I have heard the counsel for the parties and also gone through the file carefully. From the record, it is clear that the Assessing Authority had initiated the Assessment Proceedings in view of unaccounted open purchase of 1184 quintal Narma amounting to Rs.30,78,400/- for the period from 1.4.2003 to 21.1.2004 by the petitioner firm. During course of Assessment proceedings, the petitioner firm failed to produce the relevant documents in support of their claim of having paid any fees on above said purchase of Narma. In fact, the petitioner firm inspite of various opportunities granted by the Market Committee vide notice no.117 dated 4.2.2004, No.236 dated 23.2.2004, No.310 dated 10.3.2004, No.621 dated 12.5.2004 and No.656 dated 1.6.2004, for production of original record, failed to satisfy the Assessing Authority with regard to the payment of any market fees/RDF on the purchase of 1184 quintals of Narma. Consequently, the Assessing Authority passed the Assessment order on 24.6.2004 for recovery of market/fee/RDF/penalty and interest on the unaccounted purchase of Narma by the firm. In appeal, against the said Assessment order by the firm, the appellate authority has observed that the Inspection report of the District Mandi Officer clearly indicated that the firm purchased 1184 quintals of Narma on which the firm failed to pay any market fee and RDF, thus dismissing the appeal of the petitioner – vide order dated 9.8.2005.” We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Though it has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the goods were meant for processing on job basis but 2 C.W.P. No.21004 of 2008 there is nothing on record to show as to whom the goods belonged or that the same were meant for job basis. As regards the contention that the quantum has been arbitrarily worked out, there is no material to rebut the findings or to show that the same was arrived at arbitrarily. In view of above, we do not find any ground for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. Dismissed. ( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ) JUDGE December 15, 2008 ( L. N. MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 3