9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Agra, directing for release of goods on deposit of cash security equal to 15% of the gross value of the goods in question of Rs. 9,02,812/- which comes to Rs. 1,35,422/-. Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that a vehicle bearing registration No.RJ-05GA/7685 was intercepted by the Assistant Commissioner (Mobile Squad)-Vth Unit, Commercial Tax, Agra at Saiyan Road, Shamshabad Bye Pass, near Indian Oil Petrol Pump, Agra, on 7.5.2016. The aforesaid vehicle was carrying Stainless Steel Utensils. On demand of papers by the authorities intercepting the vehicle, the driver produced tax invoice No.3, dated 6.5.2016 issued by M/s. Chamunda Bartan Bhandar & Traders, Baba Market, Arya Samaj Road, Mathura TIN 09427112373 issued in favour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the fuel tank of the vehicle. On these facts the goods were seized and security to the tune of 40% of the value of goods was demanded by order dated 22.5.2016. The applicant approached Joint Commissioner (S.I.B.) who dismissed the application of the applicant by a detail and well discussed order dated 27.6.2016. Aggrieved with this order, the applicant filed the aforesaid Second Appeal No.586 of 2016 which has been disposed of by the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 24.10.2016 modifying the demand of cash security equal to 15% of the gross value of the goods. Thus the security was reduced to Rs. 1,35,422/- for release of the goods in question. Aggrieved with this order of the Tribunal, present revision has been filed. Learned counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the learned counsel for the parties. Perusal of the impugned order shows that a finding has been recorded by the Tribunal based on consideration of relevant evidences on record that the goods were actually being transported from Jodhpur in breach of the provisions of the Act without requisite forms and thus there was import of goods by the revisionist. A finding has also been recorded that the tax invoice and G.R. were handed over to the driver within the State of U.P. to adjust and cover up the transaction. Prima facie, it appears that the tax invoice was issued by the revisionist to cover up the interstate purchase of goods in question and sale thereof so as to give it colour of intra-state transaction. The provisions of Section 50 (1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
