Forty-eight-hour detention limit does not automatically void seizure where no prejudice is shown under the sales tax scheme.

A statutory forty-eight-hour limit for detention and seizure under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act and Rules must be read harmoniously with the broader inspection scheme, and non-compliance does not automatically void the seizure. The court treated prejudice, the transporter's conduct, and whether a defaulting party could benefit from its own omission as relevant considerations. On the facts, the way-bill was not produced, no prompt protest was made, and the matter proceeded to a speaking order, so the seizure was not set aside solely because it occurred after forty-eight hours.

---

---

Issues: Whether seizure of goods for non-production of way-bill after detention under section 70 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 read with rule 212 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules was vitiated because the seizure was effected after expiry of the 48-hour period.

Analysis: Section 70 contemplates interception, detention for a period not exceeding forty-eight hours, and then seizure if the prescribed particulars are not furnished. Rule 212 also allows time up to forty-eight hours for production of the way-bill, and the scheme of the Act and Rules has to be read harmoniously. The time-limit is intended to protect the transporter, but the Court held that the effect of non-compliance cannot be tested in the abstract: prejudice, conduct of the parties, and whether the defaulting party can take advantage of its own wrong are relevant considerations. On the facts, the transporter had not produced the way-bill, had not complained promptly, and had allowed the matter to proceed to a speaking order.

Conclusion: The seizure was not treated as void merely because it was effected after the 48-hour period, and the petitioner was not granted substantive relief against the impugned action.

Final Conclusion: The application was disposed of by leaving the parties to pursue the revisional remedy expeditiously, without setting aside the seizure on the sole ground of delay beyond forty-eight hours.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory time-limit for seizure under a fiscal enactment, though to be complied with strictly, does not automatically render the seizure void where the surrounding conduct shows no actionable prejudice and the provision operates within a larger harmonised statutory scheme.

---