9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (3) TMI 725X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nge, on March 5, 2004 and the order of penalty dated March 9, 2004 under section 71 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. 3.. Petitioner's grievance, as ventilated before the Tribunal, was that the authority concerned in a mechanical way seized the goods being various grades of tea though documents like challans, invoices and consignment notes in respect of the goods loaded in the truck for transportation outside West Bengal were duly shown. 4. The said case was contested by the present respondents who referring to the road challan dated March 3, 2004 submitted before the Tribunal that such challan does not indicate anything. The challan does not reflect that the 339 packets were, in fact, packages of tea. The challan does not show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o produce all other vital documents linked with the said challan before actual seizure and, as such, there could hardly be any justification for such seizure. Learned counsel Mr. Chakraborty invited our attention to the copies of the documents which have been annexed to the application and marked annexure P1. Mr. Chakraborty has then contended that the authority concerned being the Commercial Tax Officer, Howrah Range while proceeding to seize the goods has recorded that he has reasons to believe that the consignment notes and invoices have been fabricated later but no specific reason has been given in such note dated March 5, 2004 in order to justify such apprehension. 8.. Mr. Chakraborty relying upon the decision in the case of Road Tra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irects. 12.. Our attention has also been drawn to the decisions in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa reported in [1970] 25 STC 211 (SC), Mahaveer Fancy Stores v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in Karnataka reported in [1993] 89 STC 524 (Kar) and Mahaveer Conductors v. Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer reported in [1997] 104 STC 65 (Raj). 13.. Mr. Chakraborty has submitted that in absence of concrete finding of deliberate defiance of law, the authority concerned is not justified in imposing penalty. It has been stated that mere fact that supporting documents were produced subsequent to the check does not lead to the inference that those were not genuine documents. It has also been contended that intention to evade ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld while discarding those documents and if such an enquiry was held, what was its nature. 16.. It follows from the discussion, as made earlier, that there cannot be any presumption of guilt in absence of a concrete finding based on proper enquiry. The authority concerned is also expected to explore as to whether there was any intention to evade tax. Mere fact that road challan did not properly project the detailed particulars of the goods as well as the places, etc., does not always and in all circumstances justify brushing aside of such a document. 17.. It follows from the aforesaid discussion that at the time of interception of the vehicle, the authority concerned could only be shown a road challan which admittedly did not disclose t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
