Transit declaration compliance failure can trigger deemed contravention and penalty under the West Bengal sales tax rules.

A transit declaration under rule 211A places responsibility on the person taking delivery of the goods to obtain the required endorsement and produce it before the exit authority. Failure to secure that endorsement constitutes breach of the rule and is deemed a contravention of section 68 under the West Bengal Sales Tax framework. On that basis, penalty under section 71B is attracted where goods are moved in violation of the prescribed restrictions or conditions. A notice is not invalid merely because the recipient is described as a transporter, if the statutory basis and alleged contravention are otherwise clear and no prejudice is shown.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the notice in form 45A was invalid because the applicant was described as a transporter; (ii) Whether the applicant had contravened section 68 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 read with rule 211A of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995; (iii) Whether the penalty under section 71B of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 was liable to be set aside.

Issue (i): Whether the notice in form 45A was invalid because the applicant was described as a transporter.

Analysis: The notice was issued in the standard statutory form with reference to the transit declaration and the alleged contravention. The applicant was the person who made the declaration under rule 211A(1), and the description as transporter did not affect the substance of the notice or cause prejudice. The Court held that, for the purposes of the transit movement, the applicant fell within the statutory responsibility attached to the person taking delivery and moving the goods.

Conclusion: The notice was not invalid on the ground of describing the applicant as a transporter.

Issue (ii): Whether the applicant had contravened section 68 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 read with rule 211A of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995.

Analysis: Rule 211A(1) required the person taking delivery of the goods to make the declaration, and rule 211A(6) required the endorsed declaration to be produced before the exit authority. Rule 211A(8) deemed infringement of rule 211A by that person to be contravention of section 68. As the declaration was not endorsed as required, the statutory obligation under rule 211A was breached, and the breach attracted the deeming provision of section 68. The Customs Act provisions cited by the applicant were held to be inapposite because the liability in the present case arose from the applicant's own statutory duties under the sales tax rules.

Conclusion: The applicant had contravened section 68 by failing to comply with rule 211A(6).

Issue (iii): Whether the penalty under section 71B of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 was liable to be set aside.

Analysis: Section 71B permitted penalty where goods were transported in contravention of the restrictions or conditions prescribed under section 68. Since the contravention of rule 211A amounted to contravention of section 68, the statutory basis for penalty was made out. No ground was found to interfere with the order imposing penalty or with the demand notice.

Conclusion: The penalty order was not liable to be set aside.

Final Conclusion: The application failed in entirety and the penalty and demand were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A person who makes a transit declaration under rule 211A and fails to obtain the mandatory endorsement under sub-rule (6) commits a deemed contravention of section 68, attracting penalty under section 71B; a non-prejudicial misdescription in the notice does not vitiate the proceedings.

---