TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 677X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e circular is impracticable, therefore, in absence of TDF the goods cannot be seized, whereas in other decisions it was held that under the Act it is mandatorilly required that TDF must accompany the consignment on entry into the State - In view of the conflicting decisions rendered with regard to the scope of Section 52 read with Rule 58 requires to be clarified by a Larger Bench. Matter referred to Larger Bench to decide the issue whether the Transit Declaration Form (TDF) is mandatory requirement in view to the circular issued by the Commissioner read with Section 52 of the Act and Rule 58 of the Rules or in the alternative upon non-production of the TDF on interception of the goods whether a presumption that the goods are meant for sale within the State can mandatorily be drawn in view of Section 52 read with Rule 58 and the circular dated 3 September 2013 issued by the Commissioner. - Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 326 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 1-8-2017 - Hon'ble Suneet Kumar, J. For the Applicant : Markanday Singh,Abhishek Rai For the Opposite Party : C.S.C. ORDER Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned Standing Counsel for the State. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anding Counsel on the contrary has placed reliance on M/s S.B. International Gularbhoj vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax Lucknow, 2013 UPTC 1144, to contend that the provision mandatorily requires that transit pass (TDF) must be available with the consignment or must be available for downloading from the official website immediately before the goods actually enter into the State of Uttar Pradesh. In the given facts of the referred case, TDF form was generated and produced clearly two days after the entry of the goods in the State, the Court was of the opinion that generation of such TDF will not in any way dilute the mandatory requirements of the Act, therefore, upheld the order of seizure of the goods and the demand of security for release of the same. The Court, therefore, held that entry of goods within the State without TDF was in violation of the provisions of Section 52 read with Rule 58 which justified the seizure and demand of security. Learned Standing Counsel would further submit that Prakash Parcel (supra) was rendered by the Division Bench and the point in issue, inter alia, was as follows: (i) whether the Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. has exceeded in its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rendered in Prakash Parcel (supra). In Prakash Transport (supra), the question for determination was as to whether, the goods in transit are liable to be seized for want of transit declaration form . Section 52 of the Act provides for the transit of goods through State of U.P. The provision is extracted: 52. Provision for goods passing through the State-When a vehicle coming from any place outside the state and bound for any other place outside the State and carrying goods referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 50, passes through the state, the driver or other person in charge of such vehicle shall carry such documents as may be prescribed failing which it shall be presumed that the goods carried thereby are meant for sale within the state by the owner or person in charge of the vehicle. As a consequence of Section 52, the driver or he person in charge of the vehicle carrying the goods through the State is required to carry such documents as may be prescribed failing which it shall be presumed that the goods, thereby, are meant for sale within the State by the owner or the person in charge of the vehicle. Rule 58 read with Section 52 lays down that the goods passin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oning enabling downloading of Transit Declaration Form round the clock. 25. In such circumstances, the provision for downloading a Transit Declaration From and to produce it on demand as stipulated by the circular of the Commissioner dated 30.7.09 and 3.9.13 is totally impractical. Finally in paragraph 27 and 28 the Court held as follows: 27. The answer to the question, therefore, is that the goods cannot be seized for absence of Transit Declaration Form. 28. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that as the Act does not specifically provide for the seizure of goods for not carrying the Transit Declaration Form, the order of seizure dated 21.9.2013 is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained. Prakash Transport (supra) was rendered on 25 October 2013, however, S.B. International (supra) decided earlier on 8 August 2013 was not noticed. The Court while answering a similar question in S.B. International (supra) observed as follows: Therefore, under the Value Added Tax Act, it is mandatorily required that transit pass must be available with the consignmeantor must be available for downloading from the official website im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
