TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1504X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied rather it was allowed to expire after the detention of the goods by incorrectly recording the time of interception - the order of seizure dated 11.11.2018 issued under Section 129(1) of the Act to the writ petition is quashed - petition allowed. - Writ Tax No. - 1471 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 22-11-2018 - Pankaj Mithal And Ashok Kumar JJ. For the Petitioner : Rajan Tripathi For the Respondent : C.S.C. ORDER The petitioner no. 1 is a registered dealer of Kanpur in U.P. It purchased fencing wire 5.11.2018 from the Sharp Engineers, Delhi. The delivery of the fencing wire so purchased by it was to be delivered at Kanpur. Accordingly, the invoice/builty was generated on 5.11.2018 wherein GST @ 18% was charged and paid. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the goods was very much valid and that only on account of delay in the issue of the memo of seizure, the time mentioned in the e-way bill expired. The seizure memo incorrectly mentions the time of interception of the goods. In view of the above, to test and ascertain as to when actually the goods were intercepted, Sri C.B. Tripathi, Special counsel appearing for the respondents was given time on 20.8.2018 to seek instructions as to the time when the vehicle in question had entered Kanpur and was actually intercepted notwithstanding the issuance of the seizure memo on 11.11.2018. Sri C.B. Tripathi has obtained instructions in the matter from the Assistant Commissioner (Commercial Tax) Incharge MS-XI, Kanpur. The instructions disclos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot been countered by the official of the department through the above instructions. It only states that the vehicle was checked at 12:30 in the night of 10.11.2018 at Jarib Chowki, Kanpur without uttering a single word as to when the vehicle is said to have been entered Kanpur Nagar despite fact that the specific direction was issued to the respondent to seek instructions about it. In view of the above scenario, it can not be said that the allegation of the petitioners that the vehicle had entered Kanpur much before expiry of time mentioned in the eway bill is false and the interception has been deliberately and incorrectly shown after 30 minutes of the expiry of time. It may be pertinent to point out that the Act and the Rules do not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
