Way-bill non-compliance may justify seizure, but penalty fails where goods were imported for own use and not for sale.

Transport of goods without the prescribed way-bill and accompanying documents rendered the seizure lawful under the West Bengal VAT Act and Rules, because compliance with movement restrictions under section 73 and rule 103 was mandatory. However, where the authorities themselves accepted that the consignee had imported the goods for own use and not for sale or profit, the factual basis for penalty under section 77 was absent. The penalty order and revisional orders were therefore unsustainable and were set aside, while the seizure itself remained valid.

---

---

Issues: Whether penalty and consequential seizure proceedings were sustainable where goods were transported without way-bills, but the goods were found to have been imported for own use and not for sale.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required compliance with the restrictions on movement of goods under section 73 of the West Bengal VAT Act, 2003 and production of the prescribed way-bill and accompanying documents under rule 103 of the West Bengal VAT Rules, 2005. The absence of way-bills at the time of detention and seizure made the seizure lawful under section 76 of the West Bengal VAT Act, 2003. However, the authorities also recorded that the consignee had imported the goods for its own use and had no intention to sell them for profit. In that factual context, the basis for imposing penalty under section 77 of the West Bengal VAT Act, 2003 was not made out.

Conclusion: The penalty order and the revisional orders were unsustainable and were set aside; the application succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Penalty for breach of transit-document requirements is not justified where the authority accepts that the goods were imported for own use and not for sale, though the seizure itself may remain valid for want of the prescribed way-bill.

---