9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 692X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2016 issued by the third respondent - Commercial Tax Officer (I), Unit 20, Ahmedabad whereby the truck of the petitioner together with the goods has been seized in exercise of powers under sub-section (4) of section 68 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "the GVAT Act"). 3. The facts stated briefly are that the petitioner is engaged in the business of trading in ceramic tiles. The petitioner received a purchase order from M/s. Bhavya Tiles, Vadodara for supply of 790 boxes of ceramic tiles at the rate of Rs. 320/- per box. The petitioner sent the goods from Morbi to Vadodara through truck No.RJ-07-GC-1339. When the truck was passing through Naroda GIDC near Ahmedabad, the same came to be detained by the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion (4) of section 68 of the GVAT Act, the impugned action of the respondents is without authority of law and, therefore, the impugned seizure memo deserves to be quashed and set aside and the respondents are required to be directed to forthwith release the truck together with the goods. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Swapneshwar Goutam, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, reiterated the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the third respondent. It was submitted that the truck in question was stopped for the purpose of inspecting the same and the driver was asked to produce all the documents pertaining to the goods contained in the truck, however, the driver did not possess the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3), he may, after recording the reasons, seize such goods and detain the vehicle and give receipt thereof to the person from whose possession or control, the goods are seized. Sub-section (1) of section 68 empowers the State Government to direct setting up of checkposts and erection of barriers at such places as may be specified by the notification in the Official Gazette. In the facts of the present case, it is an admitted position that the truck had been detained at a place other than the check-post or barrier as contemplated under sub-section (1) of section 68 of the GVAT Act. Evidently therefore, the respondent who passed the order of seizure and detention of the truck and goods was not an officer-in-charge of a check-post or barrier as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
