9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (3) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the same from both outside and within the State of West Bengal. The petitioner has a godown also at Prakashnagar, Jalpaiguri, which he has taken on rent in September, 2000 and necessary application for amendment in the registration certificate for that has been made. Petitioner is registered under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994, and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. One Gourab Sales Agency of Delhi on the basis of the petitioner's order sent a consignment of different motor parts in 192 packages for which the petitioner duly obtained way bill in form 42 and handed the same over to the driver of vehicle No. WB-03-1851 to enable him to produce the same at Dalkhola check-post at the time of entry into West Bengal. The check-post author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is a case of importation of goods from Delhi to Calcutta and there can be no possible reason for the goods to reach Dalkhola check-post which is too far away in the north from the usual route. Moreover, there is no document showing endorsement of the documents at Dalkhola checkpost. There is no way bill also. The story of unloading at Jalpaiguri and reloading in a different truck as made has been introduced to create confusion to cover up the petitioner's clandestine import business. Moreover, discrepancy had been found on the number of packages on verification. The detention order has been made giving valid reason thereof. The seizure also has been made by giving proper reason on being objectively satisfied. It is also stated that no w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onerous provisions as compared to the one contained in rule 214Binasmuch as production of endorsed way bill in the case of rule 212 is a must, but this is not so in the case of rule 214B. In case of rule 214B the driver is to carry with him only the declaration referred to in sub-rule (1) of that rule and a consignment note, delivery note, invoice, road challan or any other document of like nature. Moreover, under rule 212, there is provision for actual verification of consignment of goods regarding description, quantity, weight or value with the one given in way bill, but in rule 214B there is only provision for presenting the declaration and some document (not way bill) before the authority who is only to verify the particulars of such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uced at any stage before the statutory authority by the petitioner. Admittedly, goods found and seized are taxable goods and admittedly those motor parts were manufactured in Delhi. The petitioner himself admits that the goods seized are the goods which have been imported. Admittedly as per the road challan, the goods were sent by the petitioner to self bearing his Calcutta address. If the said goods had entered West Bengal from Delhi through the Dalkhola check-post though that is not the normal route, at least there must be the endorsed way bill in form 42 to prove that. Such a vital document the way bill was never produced. Moreover, discrepancy was also found by the authority-respondent No. 1 while verifying the document. No details of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and documents filed that the goods admittedly were taxable goods and had been sent by truck from Delhi and those were manufactured in Delhi but no document could be shown by the petitioner about its entry in West Bengal earlier by presenting way bill endorsed either by official of usual Duburdih check-post entry point or of the alleged unusual Dalkhola check-post entry point. In the background of such facts and circumstances we agree with learned State Representative that provisions of rule 212 will apply and the petitioner having failed to comply with the procedures mandated therein the seizure, as has been made following the prescribed procedure is valid and lawful. When relevant documents needed to be produced are not produced, goods a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tting aside the order dated March 22, 2001, imposing penalty passed by the respondent No. 1. We make it clear that we are not setting aside that order because of any infirmity in it. In view of the admitted importation of those goods into West Bengal and in view of the nonproduction of any way bill in respect of such importation even at the penalty proceedings, the respondent No. 1's refusal to accept the alleged story of movement having originated in Jalpaiguri cannot be called irrational. The resultant non-application of rule 214B is also logical. The contention of Mr. S.K. Chakraborty, learned advocate for the applicant, that respondent No. 1 failed to give proper consideration to the lapse of more than two months between the date of end ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
