Transit goods seizure cannot rest on mere non-filing of form 16 where documents show bona fide movement and accountal.

Goods in transit accompanied by the required documents could not be seized merely because form 16 was not deposited with the nearest departmental office on entry into the State. The lapse was only a procedural omission and did not, by itself, show that the goods were not traceable to a bona fide dealer or properly accounted for in the ordinary course of business. On those facts, a bare apprehension of diversion for local sale was insufficient to justify seizure. The goods were therefore liable to be released without insisting on security.

---

---

Issues: Whether seizure of goods was justified when the transporting vehicle carried the required documents but form 16 was not deposited with the nearest departmental office, and whether the goods could be released without furnishing security.

Analysis: The goods were accompanied by the necessary documents and were shown to be in transit from one identified dealer to another. The only lapse noticed was non-submission of form 16 immediately on entering the State. That omission, by itself, did not establish that the goods were not traced to a bona fide dealer or that they were not properly accounted for in the ordinary course of business. On the facts, the apprehension of diversion for local sale was insufficient to sustain the seizure.

Conclusion: The seizure was illegal and the goods were liable to be released without insisting on any security.

---