Seizure of goods in transit fails where statutory documents are produced before seizure despite an incomplete way-bill

Seizure of goods in transit was unlawful where the statutory documents were produced before the vehicle and consignment were seized, even though the way-bill had initially been left incomplete. The court held that detention and seizure powers under the sales tax law require a valid basis to suspect evasion and cannot rest on mere apprehension once supporting papers are available. A public authority exercising statutory power must act reasonably and in good faith. On these facts, the seizure was held illegal and the challenge succeeded for the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seizure of the vehicle and consignment was legally justified when documents were produced before the actual seizure, though the way-bill was initially incomplete and not properly filled.

Analysis: The power of detention and seizure under the sales tax law depends on a valid basis to suspect evasion and on the goods being found without proper and genuine supporting documents. On the facts, the documents required by law were produced before seizure, and the later production of supporting papers could not be ignored merely because the way-bill had not been duly completed at the first instance. A public authority exercising statutory power must act reasonably and in good faith, and the factual matrix did not justify seizure only on apprehension.

Conclusion: The seizure was held to be illegal and unjustified, and the challenge succeeded in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Where statutory documents are produced before seizure, mere suspicion based on an incompletely filled way-bill is insufficient to sustain seizure absent a legally sustainable basis to treat the transport as unauthorised or evasive.

---