Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2003 (8) TMI 479

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s loaded on truck No. PBK 9321 and covered by Sale Invoice No. 12000637 dated July 29, 2003, truck No. HR. 38D 6404 and covered by Sale Invoice No. 12000638 dated July 29, 2003 and truck No. GJ 6V 6621 and covered by Sale Invoice No. 12000639 dated July 29, 2003 respectively. 3.. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner purchased three Tata Hitachi Model Ex 300 LCH hydraulic Excavators with granite bucket and kit from Telco Construction Equipment Company Limited, Jamshedpur and transported the same in trucks to their place of business at Madurai as the petitioner is the granite quarry owner and excavating and exporting granite blocks to foreign countries. At the time of transportation, the Check-post Officer, the respondent herei .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... en paid, or whether the sale or purchase of the goods carried has, for the purpose of the payment of tax under the TNGST Act, been properly accounted for in the documents referred to in sub-section (5), such as bills of sale, or delivery notes, or such other document as may be prescribed. If on examination and inspection it appears that the tax, if any, payable under the TNGST Act in respect of the sale or purchase of the goods carried, has been paid, or that the sale or purchase of the goods carried has, for the purpose of payment of tax under the TNGST Act, been properly accounted for in the documents such as bills of sale or delivery notes, the said officer shall release the goods vehicle with the goods carried. 7.. Section 42 further .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an twenty-four hours except with the permission of the next higher authority. Sub-section (8-A) vests with the check-post officer the discretion to permit the person in-charge of the goods vehicle detained under sub-section (8) to keep the goods in the office godown or other place within the State belonging to the owner of the goods vehicle. 8.. The above is the statutory provision which categorises the circumstances under which the goods could be detained by the checkpost officer. The section is so couched concentrating only on the tax liability on the sale or purchase of the goods under the TNGST Act or CST Act in view of the adoption of the TNGST provisions. None of the contingencies provided in the statute are available in the present .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . It also prescribes the procedure for filing returns, assessment, re-assessment, payment of tax, refund, exemption. The Act further provides for appeal or revision, infliction of penalty and impounding of vehicle. Certainly, it is not the case of the respondent that the goods were impounded by invoking the provisions under the Entry Tax Act, 1990 as it is obvious that the goods has not been reached the petitioner's place. No returns or no assessment as provided under sections 7 and 8 of the Entry Tax Act, 1990 has been made nor such stage has been reached. 12.. The learned counsel for the petitioner advanced argument that the goods are not liable for entry tax as it is not a motor vehicle as defined either in the Entry Tax Act or under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he case of Bose Abraham v. State of Kerala reported in [2001] 121 STC 614 to contend otherwise. 15.. I am of the considered opinion that I need not delve deep and consider these points as the point of applicability or otherwise of the Entry Tax Act is not the dispute to be resolved in this case, but the dispute is as to the correctness of the goods detention order passed by the respondent. If the respondent has taken a little bit pain to look into the provision of section 42 of the TNGST Act, which he invoked for passing the impugned orders, he would not have passed the orders impugned. The reasoning given in the impugned orders are ex facie illegal as not supported by the said provision or any authority of law, as such the same are liabl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates