Unauthorized tax demand on properly documented goods cannot be enforced through vehicle detention without statutory authority.

Detention of a vehicle and demand for tax on a transported consignment cannot be sustained when they rest only on administrative instructions and not on any statutory authority. Where the consignment is accompanied by proper documents, tax may be levied or collected only by authority of law, and executive directions cannot create a substitute levy. Continued detention to compel payment is arbitrary and amounts to an unauthorised exaction. The court therefore treated the detention and tax demand as illegal and without authority of law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention of the vehicle and the demand for tax on the transported consignment, made solely on administrative instructions and without any statutory authority, were lawful.

Analysis: The demand was made against a consignment covered by proper documents, without reliance on any statutory provision or rule authorising collection of tax in the manner adopted. Tax can be levied or collected only by authority of law, and administrative directions cannot substitute for a statutory levy. The continued detention of the vehicle to compel payment was therefore arbitrary and amounted to an unauthorised exaction.

Conclusion: The detention and tax demand were illegal and without authority of law, and the writ petition was rightly allowed.

---