Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Hari Cargo Carrier Versus State of Uttarakhand & others

2016 (6) TMI 141 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

Seeking release of seized goods - Form 16, contemplated under Section 48 of the Act read with Rule 30 of the Uttarakhand VAT Rules, 2005, was not accompanying the goods - appellant/writ petitioner is not a registered dealer, as he is not doing any intra-State sale in the State of Uttarakhand - Held that:- when there is a disputed question of fact, ordinarily, the relegating of a party to an alternate forum is not to be faulted. In such circumstances, particularly when a learned Single Judge has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see - Special Appeal No. 603 of 2015 - Dated:- 9-3-2016 - K. M. Joseph (CJ) And V. K. Bist, JJ. For the Petitioner : S. K. Posti For the Respondent : H. M. Bhatia JUDGMENT K. M. Joseph, CJ. Appellant is the writ petitioner. Two writ petitions were filed by the appellant / writ petitioner. Mr. S.K. Posti, learned counsel appearing for the appellant / writ petitioner does not dispute that the prayers in both the writ petitions are the same. The prayers made in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1967 of 2015 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Mandamus commanding the respondents not to insist for import declaration form in case of purchase of goods for personal use. 2. According to the appellant / writ petitioner, it is a carrier. It was entrusted with certain goods to be carried from Delhi. According to the appellant / writ petitioner, the goods are all subjected to tax under the CST. While the goods were being transported, the vehicles were detained by the authority under the Uttarakhand Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (hereinafter re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l. It is against the same that the appeal is lodged. A single appeal is filed challenging the order passed in both the writ petitions by paying separate court fee. 3. We have heard Mr. S.K. Posti, learned counsel appearing for the appellant / writ petitioner and Mr. H.M. Bhatia, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant / writ petitioner would reiterate the facts. He would submit that the only reason given in the show-cause was that Form 16, contemplated .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

person, who is importing goods otherwise than in connection with business, to apply for the certificate. More importantly, it is submitted that sub-rule (2) of Rule 30 only contemplates a registered dealer, who can apply for a certificate. Learned counsel also refers to sub-rule (4) of Rule 30, which provides as follows: (4) If the Assessing Authority is satisfied that the demand of the dealer for blank declaration form is genuine and reasonable, he may issue such number of forms as he deems fit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version