Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (4) TMI 599

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ugh the State of U.P. was detained at Kanpur and ultimately seized vide order dated 21.12.2011 on the ground that the vehicle had deviated from the route disclosed in the Transit Declaration Form and was found within the city limits of Kanpur giving rise to the presumption that the goods have been down loaded in Kanpur with the object of sale in U.P. It has further been said that on inquiry from the concerned Tax Officers at Haryana and at Sasaram both the seller and purchaser firms are dealing in plastic goods and the Haryana dealer has disowned the sale of the said goods. Against the order of seizure, a representation of the revisionist under Section 48(7) of the U.P. VAT Act, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was rejected on 28.12.201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ll be accompanied by such documents as may be prescribed failing which it will be presumed that the goods carried were meant for sale within the State of U.P. by owner and person-in-charge of the Vehicle. According to the plain reading of the aforesaid provision the presumption that the goods carried by such a vehicle passing through the State of U.P. are meant for sale within the State of U.P. can only be drawn when the said goods are not being accompanied by the prescribed documents. Rules 58 of the Rules provide that such a vehicle while coming from outside the State of U.P. and bound for a destination outside the U.P. while passing through the State of U.P. shall carry such documents and follow such procedures as may be prescribed by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Kanpur and Varanasi. So Kanpur was one of the cities through which the vehicle was to pass while in transit in U.P. There is no column in the aforesaid Transit Declaration Form for specifying the exact road through which the vehicle would pass while crossing a particular city as mentioned in the Form. In the absence such specific column, if the vehicle has been found at Kanpur which is one of the point of route disclosed in the Transit Declaration Form, it cannot be said that the vehicle had deviated from the disclosed route giving rise to any presumption as stipulated either under Section 52 of the Act or Rule 58 of the Rules. In view of above, the seizure of goods on the aforesaid ground is not justified. Apart from the above the driv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o prove that the revisionist is not dealing in paper and his transactions are confined to plastic goods. The said dealer had contested the proceedings at every stage. He was not confronted with such an allegation. In Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P. Lucknow Vs. S/s Sagir Khan and Zahir Khan, Rampur 2005 NTN (28) 129 the learned Single Judge of this court observed as under:- The provision to issue transit pass at the entry check post and to surrender at the exit check post is to ensure that the goods, which entered inside the State of U.P. had gone outside the State of U.P. and has not been sold inside the State of U.P. The power to seize the goods is only available at the exit check post when it is found that the transporter is trying .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... defeated, if the goods on entering or not taken out of the State. The goods upto the stage they reached Kanpur were intact in the vehicle and the time of their exit from U.P. had not expired and in the absence of any material to substantively demonstrate that they were likely to be sold in U.P. it cannot be said that they were likely to be sold within the State in attempt to evade tax. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the legal position as narrated above, I am of the opinion that as the goods in question were duly accompanied by the relevant documents and there was no defect in following the procedure prescribed, no presumption could have arisen to the effect that the goods were meant for sale within the State of U.P .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates