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

2011 (4) TMI 1306

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ich may have give a legitimate presumption of their being sold in U.P. It is also pertinent to note that the goods were detained prior to the expiry of the time of exit of the goods from U.P. as declared in the transit declaration form. The order of seizure dated 10.2.2011, the order dated 22.2.2011 rejecting the representation under Section 48(7) of the Act and that of the tribunal dated 30.3.2011 to be illegal and without jurisdiction - Once the seizure is held invalid, the issue as to whether the tribunal was justified in directing for release of the goods on deposit of cash security twice the amount of tax leviable in place of 40% of the estimated value of the goods, as provided under the Act, fails into oblivion and, as such, need n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vening prominent points. The consignment of goods, however, was detained on 2.2.2011 at Kannauj whereupon, after service of show cause notice and on consideration of reply, seizure order was passed on 10.2.2011. The representation under Section 48(7) of the Act against the seizure order was rejected by the Joint Commissioner (SIB) Commercial Tax, Etawah on 22.2.2011 against which second appeal was preferred before the Commercial Tax Tribunal, Kanpur. The appeal was partly allowed and upholding the seizure, the goods were directed to be released on furnishing cash security of twice the amount of tax on the estimated value of the goods seized. I have heard Sri Bharat Ji Agarwal, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri S.D. Singh, learned cou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... provides that the vehicle carrying goods from outside the State and bound for any other place outside the State of U.P., while passing through the State of U.P. shall carry such documents as may be prescribed, failing which it shall be presumed that the goods are meant for sale within the State of U.P. Rule 58 of the Rules framed under the Act also makes a similar provision and puts an obligation upon the driver or the person in-charge of the vehicle carrying the goods to follow such procedure as may be determined from time to time and to carry such documents as may be prescribed by the Commissioner failing which it shall be presumed that the goods carried are meant for sale within the State. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... valued or that they were being loaded or unloaded in the State of U.P. which may have give a legitimate presumption of their being sold in U.P. It is also pertinent to note that the goods were detained prior to the expiry of the time of exit of the goods from U.P. as declared in the transit declaration form. In the case of Madhya Bharat Transport Co. Vs. C.T.T. 2003 NTN (Vold.23) 1009, which was a case under U.P. Trade Tax Act having identical provisions para materia with that of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act in respect of search and seizure of goods, this Court clearly laid down that where there is no case that the goods were being unloaded or loaded within the State of U.P. that too during the period in which they had to pass from U.P., .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation form and the doubt expressed about the possibility of said vehicle being against used within a short span for transporting goods from Delhi to Patna is not the relevant criteria for inferring that the present goods are likely to be sold in U.P., inasmuch as the actual use of vehicle for transportation of the present consignment is not in dispute. Moreover, the authenticity of the past transaction has neither been verified nor is the subject matter of the present case. Similarly, learned counsel for the department is unable to explain as to how the making of bilty and then the invoice would caste a doubt upon the authenticity of the transit of the goods. Even the discrepancy in the weight of consignment appears to be not relevant as .....

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