9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (12) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und the security deposit, collected from the petitioner-firm as per exhibit P5. There is also a very ambitious prayer in the original petition to the effect that a direction should be issued to the 2nd respondent, not to detain the petitioner's goods, in relation to which, sales tax has been paid to the appropriate assessing authority, at Walayar check-post, on the ground of undervaluation. The petitioner is dealing in hides and skins at Quilon and Trivandrum, a registered dealer under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (in short, "the Act") and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. It is stated that the petitioner purchased 720 hides as per purchase bills dated January 19, 1991 to March 11, 1991, locally. They were intended to be delivered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on checking the goods mentioned in the delivery note, transported in lorry No. TDI 1219, found that the goods are not supported by proper documents as required by section 29(2)(a) of the Act. Therein he had referred to the nature of the goods, the number, the name of the consignor and the consignee, the document produced, namely, the delivery note No. 840106 dated March 13, 1991, etc. The Sales Tax Inspector was of the view that the value stated in the delivery note is too low when compared to the prevailing market rate. He estimated the market rate of the goods at Rs. 2,16,000 and held that there is undervaluation to the extent of Rs. 56,940. Two reasons were given for detaining the goods: (1) The value of the goods noted in the deliver ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m of Rs. 4,556 was paid towards security by the petitioner. It is, thereafter, the petitioner has filed this original petition assailing exhibits P2 and P4 and has also asked for a direction to refund the security deposit of Rs. 4,556, as evidenced by exhibit P5. 2.. We heard counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.A. Mohammed. In the light of the delivery note, which has admittedly been tendered before the sales tax check-post, as could be seen from exhibit P2 itself, we felt that the apprehension of the petitioner, that even in cases of bona fide transport, the authorities are likely to abuse their powers, is not far-fetched. We requested the learned Senior Government Pleader, Mr. N.N. Divakaran Pillai, to contact the appropriate authority an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ehension as to how and on what basis the Check-post Inspector could surmise that the value of the goods noted in the delivery note is too low when compared to prevailing market rate. What is the material or basis, to say that the value of the goods mentioned in the delivery note, does not represent the market rate, is not stated either in exhibit P2 notice, nor brought to our notice at the time of hearing. We could not understand as to how the officer surmised and estimated the market value of the goods at Rs. 2,16,000. In the light of the delivery note produced before us, wherein the receipt of tax has been endorsed by the appropriate assessing authority, and wherein the bill amount is mentioned as the value of the goods, we have no hesita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly fair for the respondents to refund the security collected as per exhibit P5. They shall do so forthwith. 3.. Ordinarily, the matter should rest here. But the petitioner's counsel voiced great concern at the increasing tendency of the check-post officials to detain goods at their ipse dixit and demanding security without caring to apply their mind to the various documents produced before them and exercising their powers arbitrarily and harassing the persons who move the goods across the check-post. So counsel for the petitioner made a fervent appeal to us that this Court should direct the respondents, especially the 2nd respondent, not to detain the petitioner's goods, in relation to which, sales tax has been paid to the concerned asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... islature under List II, entry 54 of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. But it should not be forgotten that every statutory power should be exercised fairly, honestly and reasonably. If a particular movement of goods is inspected in transit and the officer feels genuinely that there is an attempt at evasion of tax, he can search, inspect, detain or seize the goods as per the statutory provisions, but it can be so done only on the basis of some material. It cannot be done at the mere ipse dixit of the officer. There should be something more than mere guess-work. It should not be done in an arbitrary or capricious manner. We are afraid that this essential pre-requisite to exercise the powers vested in the officers under section 29A of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
