9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 499X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ought to have paid the tax and got the goods released. There is no necessity to file a writ petition. Instead, the petitioner espoused the cause of the purported owner (importer) by filing a writ petition directly before this court. It was altogether unnecessary in the light of the fact that the authorities acting under the act are duty bound to release the goods on payment of tax as per section 67 (4) Of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. There is no difficulty in concluding that the 1st respondent was competent to not only detained the goods under section 67 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 but also was competent to issue notice/order under section 72 of the aforesaid Act. There is no illegality - Petition dismissed. - W.P.Nos.23463 & 23464 of 2012 And M.P. Nos.1 and 1 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 19-5-2020 - Mr. Justice C. Saravanan For the Petitioner : Mr.S.Raveekumar For the Respondents : Mr. R.Swarnavel, G.A. COMMON ORDER By this common order both writ petitions are being disposed. The petitioner has challenged impugned proceeding of the 1st respondent dated 13.8.2012 bearing reference GD.No. 8/2012-13 and GD No. 9/2000 12-13. By the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iv)Order dated 02.12.2014 made in W.P.No.31357 of 2014 M/s.So.Ro.Import Export Company Vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer and Check Post Officer; (v)Circular No.33/2014 dated 17.07.2014 issued by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes; (vi)Order dated 14.11.2016 made in W.P.Nos.39662 33933 of 2016 M/s.Jagadamba Traders Vs. The Commercial Tax Officer. 7.The 2nd respondent has filed a detailed counter and an additional counter on behalf of the respondents justifying the detention and the impugned order passed under section 72 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. 8.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. I have also peruse the documents produced before me. The importer Unik Traders, Bangalore imported poppy seeds through the Tuticorin port and had purportedly appointed the petitioner as its consignment agent and had issued a consignment note and two e-Sugam Forms dated 23.07.2012.. 9.The movement of the imported consignments were on the strength of these E-SUGAM Forms issued under Section 53 (2-A) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 Rule 157 (1) (a) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Rules, 2005. The importer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise give any person, who has committed or is reasonably suspected of having committed an offence under the Act, an option to pay within a specified period, by way of composition of such offence such amounts under sub clause (a) or under sub clause (b) of section 72. It is only an option. 14.The petitioner is registered before the 2nd respondent and holds a valid registration under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. 15.Though the petitioner claims to be consignment agent who acted on behalf of M/s.Unik Traders, Bangalorehe importer, the circumstances indicate others. Though the detention notice dated 7.8.2012 called upon the owner also to appear, yet there is no representation before the 1st respondent by the saidM/s.Unik Traders, Bangalore. Instead of any response from the said importer namelyM/s. Unik Traders, Bangalore, the petitioner filed the above mentioned two writ petitions to have the goods released. Thus, confirming the position of the respondents that there was a sale between M/s. Unik Traders, Bangalore and the petitioner and that the goods had not suffered tax on its sale. It would have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er this Act, been properly accounted for in the documents referred to in sub-section (5). 19.As per Section 67(3) of the Act, if, on such examination and inspection it appears - (a) (i) that the tax, if any payable under this Act in respect of the sale or purchase of the goods carried, has been paid, or (ii) that the sale or purchase of the goods carried has, for the purpose of payment of tax under this Act, been properly accounted for in the documents referred to in sub-section (5), the said officer shall release the goods vehicle or boat with the goods carried; or (b) (i) that the tax, if any, payable under this Act in respect of the sale or purchase of the goods carried, has not been paid; or (ii) that the sale or purchase of the goods carried has, for the purpose of payment of tax under this Act, not been properly accounted for in the documents referred to in sub-section (5), and if the said officer is satisfied, after making such enquiry as he deems fit, that with a view to prevent the evasion of tax payable in respect of the sale or purchase of the goods carried, it is necessary to detain the goods, he shall detain the goods and direct the driver or any other p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
