9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1806X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ale of M.S. Ingots, etc (Iron and steel-declared commodity). It consigned certain quantity of M.S. Ignots to the consignee M/S Shree Satguru Metalloys Pvt. Ltd., Meerut by excise-cum-tax invoice no. 08/369 dated 22.09.2015. The said goods during transportation from Aligarh to the consignees place at Muzaffar Nagar were seized vide order dated 24.09.2015 on the ground that the Form-21 accompanying the goods was filled up by two pens in different inks and the entries made in one of the inks were likely to evaporate after some time. The representation of the revisionist under Section 48 (7) of the Act was rejected by the Joint Commissioner on 28.09.2015 and the appeal to the Tribunal too was dismissed on 07.10.2015. The only question for cons ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charge of the vehicle. Rule 54 of the Rules provides that the goods referred to in Section 50 (1) of the Act should be accompanied apart from other things by a cash memo, bill, invoice or challan. Thus, the goods under consignment are necessarily to be accompanied by transport memo in prescribed Form 21 an addition to the documents which are required to accompany the goods under Rule 55 read with Rule 54 i.e. Cash-memo, Bill invice or Challan. The aforesaid provisions no where lays down the manner in which the Form-21 has to be filled up. It is admitted on record that at the time of seizure the goods were accompanied by all documents including Form 21 properly filled up. The only discrepancy pointed out for seizing the goods is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nee. In view of these documents, it cannot be said that the assessee had committed any illegality in the transportation of the goods and that they were not accompanied by the necessary documents duly filled up. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the question raised above is answered in favour of the revisionist and against the revenue and it is held that the Tribunal committed an error in affirming the order of seizer. The goods were not liable to be seized for the reason that the entries in the prescribed Form accompanying the goods were in such ink as would not last long. Accordingly, the orders dated 07.10.2015 passed by Commercial Tax Tribunal, Meerut Bench-II, Meerut and 24.09.2015 passed by Assistant Commissioner Trad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
