9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 615X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n West Bengal and outside the State of West Bengal after purchasing the same both from West Bengal and from outside West Bengal. As per different orders of various parties of Vatinda, Moga, Simla and Batala for supply of napthalene, the petitioner sent the same to those consignees through the Amritsar Transport Company Pvt. Ltd., and made over the invoice, challan, consignment note, etc., to the driver of truck number HR-38/D-4272, which truck was loaded with goods of the petitioner and other goods of some other persons. On April 19, 2001 at about 4:30 p.m. when the truck reached near the Duburdih check-post, the same was intercepted by respondent No. 1, on whose direction the driver produced documents like challan, consignment note, etc. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confessed that the challans were fake and Shri Pande signed in the order sheet in the penalty proceeding. As such the seizure is lawful. The valuation has been rationally fixed. Amount of penalty that has been imposed is not excessive and as such the order of penalty requires to be sustained. The only point for consideration is whether the order of seizure and the order of penalty can be sustained or not. This being a case of transportation of goods from any place in West Bengal to any place outside of West Bengal, the person transporting is under obligation to follow the restrictions and conditions mentioned in rule 214C of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995 read with section 73 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994. Any dealer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to come to such a vague conclusion. Nothing has been mentioned in the order that the documents produced did not corroborate with the goods loaded in the truck. No reason has been given by the respondent No. 1 as to why he formed the opinion that the challans were not genuine. It is the contention of the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the seizure was made on such vague allegations in a high-handed manner only to somehow augment Government revenue. Lastly, it has been argued that there has been consignments of other persons also in the said truck. Those were also seized. Even if the driver says that some challans were fake, it cannot in that eventuality also conclusively prove that those fake challans related only to the consignment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore sub-section (2A) to section 73 was brought in the statute book. This sub-section was brought in the statute book with effect from April 1, 2003 when falseness, fakeness, incorrectness of the documents were required to be seen by the concerned revenue authority for the purpose of seizure. But even at that time fakeness, falseness or incorrectness of the documents is required to be seen or scrutinised only in respect of description, quantity or weight and value of the goods transported. An omnibus statement in this case of the respondent No. 1 as made without any supporting evidence as discussed above cannot be a ground for seizure in such a case of transportation. Therefore, the order of seizure as made cannot be sustained. In view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
