9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 949X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the respondents to certify this honourable court, all the records of the proceedings in which the order of seizure, if any, is passed and after examining the legality and/or propriety, quash the same. (d) That to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order requiring the respondents and in particular the respondent No. 2 (Check-post Officer) to certify to this honourable High Court all the records of the proceedings in which the impugned notices (annexures P/9 and P/10) proposing penalty is issued and after examining the legality and/or propriety thereof, quash the same. (e) To issue a writ of prohibition and/or any other writ direction or order forebearing the respondents from taking any action for levy of pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order sheets) the check-post officer (Sales Tax Officer) issued 3 show cause notices (annexure P/7) and (annexure P/9) on December 25, 1992. So far as show cause notice, i.e., annexure P/7 was concerned, it was issued under section 29-A(8) of the Act. It was said in the said show cause notice that on an inspection being carried out of truck No. MPO9 D 6584, on December 17, 1992 at about 11 at check-post Naka, Sendhwa, it was noticed that declarations relating to goods kept in the vehicle were incomplete. It was therefore, said that after inspection and verification of goods, the same are to be seized. As regards the other notice dated December 25, 1993 (annexure P/9) issued under section 29-A(11) ibid. it was, inter alia, alleged that on in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equirement of section 29(4) and (5) and having satisfied the check-post officer about the identity of the goods in question and the supporting documents filed, there did not arise any case either for seizure of the goods or even for imposition of penalty under section 29-A of the Act. Learned counsel maintained that even check-post officer had no material with him on the basis of which he could find and then record his satisfaction as contemplated under section 29-A(7) and (8) of the Act. This requirement according to learned counsel, for the petitioner, was sine qua non and the same being not available, it goes to the root of the matter in quashing the impugned notices. These were the main submissions of the learned counsel for the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enalty be not levied. The fact that the description mentioned in the documents tendered for inspection do not tally with the goods kept in trucks was sufficient to attract the rigour of not only sub-section (7) but (8) as well for seizing the goods and proceeding ahead for taking further action of imposing penalty as contemplated under other sub-sections of section 29-A ibid. 11.. This is not a case as attempted to be argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner of a no material on record for invoking sub-sections (7) and (8). It is also not a case of inadequate material nor it is a case of not granting any opportunity before impugned action is initiated. It is a case where the check-post officer has actually found the material for pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
