9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owner of the Truck bearing registration No. W.B. 73-C-3535. The vehicle is hired by a transport company, viz, Anand Express Freight Carrier Pvt. Ltd. having its head office at PP-9 Extension Laxminagar Delhi-92 and area office at Anand House, Plot No. 79/1-115-116-117 Lasudia Panehal Compound, Dewas Naka, Indore (M.P.), for transportation of goods from Siliguri to Rajkot and Ahmedabad. An agreement is entered into to that effect; however, the same is not on record. The vehicle passes through the State of Madhya Pradesh. On 12/03/2013, the vehicle in question entered the State of Madhya Pradesh through its first check post situated at Dinara (Sikroda) Check Post, District Shivpuri (M.P.). As the goods carried were out-to-out, the carrier was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed of. In consonance whereof show cause notice on 04/04/2014 was issued to the petitioner as to why the vehicle in question be not confiscated. The Competent Authority after taking into consideration the reply filed by the transporter observed:- On these findings, the vehicle in question is confiscated by order dated 27/08/2014. An appeal preferred against the order dated 27/08/2014 was dismissed on 13/02/2015. Second Appeal under Section 46(2) of 2002 Act came to be dismissed on 13/11/2017, whereagainst present appeal is filed on the following substantial question of law:- (i) Whether the appellant said to have been covered under the definition of "transporter" in terms of the provisions of Section 57 when her vehicle was not involve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... State through its first check post situated at Dinara (Sikroda) check post, District Shivpuri. It is a matter of record that the goods carried were out-to-out and on presentation of Form 59 the value of goods as shown in the sale bill was on lower side. This led the Authorities to issue notice. The transporter, which includes the present petitioner, admitted the guilt and compounded the offence under Section 57(17) of 2002 Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 57 of the Act 2002 mandates that the State Government or the Commissioner may, with a view to prevent or check evasion of tax under this Act, set up or erect in such manner as may be prescribed, check posts or barriers at such places in the State, as may be notified in the official gazette ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in clause (a) at the nearest Commercial Tax Office, immediately after entry into the State of Madhya Pradesh or before exit from the State, he shall be deemed to have complied with the requirement made under clause (b): Provided also that if the transporter transporting goods carries with him an electronically issued declaration form specified in clause (a), particulars of which including date and approximate time of entering the State of Madhya Pradesh, have been uploaded completely on the official web portal of the department before entering the State of Madhya Pradesh, alongwith the documents, he shall be deemed to have complied with the requirement made under clause (b). Sub-section (5) of Section 57 of 2002 Act, in respect of any go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on (8) or (10) is furnished. Sub-section (8) of Section 57 of 2002 Act stipulates:- "(8) The check post officer or the officer empowered under sub-section (5), after having given the transporter a reasonable opportunity of being heard and after having held such enquiry as he may deem fit, shall,- (i) release the goods or the vehicle or carrier along with the goods in favour of the transporter, if he is satisfied that no violation of the provisions of subsection( 2) has taken place; or (ii) impose, if he is not satisfied, on him for possession or movement of goods, whether seized or not, in violation of the provisions of sub-section (2) or for submission of false or forged documents or declaration, a penalty equal to maximum five time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... admission of guilt and having paid twice the amount of penalty, the collusion with the dealer involved in avoidance or evasion of tax stood established beyond any iota of doubt. The contention that with the compounding of offence the illegality gets validated and that an action under sub-section (9) of Section 57 of 2002 Act is not attracted is taken note of and rejected at the outset. The depositing of penalty which is twice the amount of tax establishes the factum that the transporter in possession or in control of goods has colluded with the dealer who evades the tax, which attracts action under sub-section (9) of Section 57 of 2002 Act. Trite it is that in construing provisions designed to prevent tax evasion, if the legislature uses w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
