Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2010 (8) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2010 (8) TMI 1018 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Issues involved: The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P., Lucknow filed revisions against the order of the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Jhansi allowing appeals related to the seizure of goods under Section 48 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008.

Details of the judgment:

1. The main ground for seizure was the alleged manipulation of documents showing the transit of goods from Madhya Pradesh to Himachal Pradesh. The department claimed that the goods were loaded from Jhansi, not Chhatarpur, Madhya Pradesh.

2. The key question was whether the seizure was justified despite the opposite parties providing all required documents. Section 48 of the Act allows seizure of goods not accounted for by the dealer or not traceable to a bona fide dealer.

3. Section 52 of the Act deals with the transit of goods through U.P., requiring authorization for transit and specific documentation. The scheme aims to prevent the sale of goods in U.P. meant for destinations outside the state.

4. All necessary documents were produced by the opposite parties at the time of seizure, including valid transit certificates. No discrepancies were found in the documentation accompanying the goods.

5. The department's claim that the consigner was not traceable and the goods were loaded from Jhansi was not substantiated with concrete evidence. Statements from the drivers and uncontroverted affidavits supported the opposite parties' version.

6. The tribunal's order setting aside the seizure was upheld as there was no valid ground for seizure based on the evidence presented. The revisions were dismissed as no other points were raised or pressed.

This judgment clarifies the legal requirements for seizure of goods under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation and evidence to support seizure actions.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates