Octroi payment is not conclusive proof of delivery; disputed receipt of goods requires fresh enquiry and driver evidence.

Payment of octroi is not conclusive proof that disputed goods were actually received by the assessee, so it cannot by itself justify levy of tax and penalty. Where delivery under the relevant R.R. remains in dispute and the transport record does not show who accepted the goods, the driver who handled the consignment is a material witness and should ordinarily be examined before a final decision is taken. The existing material was insufficient for sustaining the demand, and the matter required remand for a fresh enquiry after proper evidence, including the driver's statement if available.

---

---

Issues: Whether mere deposit of octroi could conclusively establish import and delivery of the disputed goods so as to justify levy of tax and penalty, and whether the matter required fresh enquiry by recording the driver's evidence before a final decision.

Analysis: The disputed goods were not found at the time of verification, and the transport partner was unable to state who actually received them at the destination. The record of octroi payment was treated as relevant but not conclusive proof of delivery to the assessee. Since the core controversy was who received delivery under the concerned R.R., evidence from the driver who handled the consignment was material and necessary. The earlier direction on remand required proper enquiry, and the authorities erred in treating octroi payment as sufficient to dispense with further verification from the driver.

Conclusion: The levy of tax and penalty on the existing material could not be sustained, and the matter had to be remanded for fresh enquiry after recording the driver's statement if available.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded, the impugned orders were set aside, and the assessing authority was required to decide the matter afresh after proper evidence was taken.

Ratio Decidendi: Payment of octroi is not conclusive proof of actual receipt or delivery of goods, and where delivery is in dispute, the evidence of the person who effected delivery is relevant and should ordinarily be examined before tax or penalty is finally imposed.

---