TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Transporter wins case due to missing form, goods released with alternative proof</h1> The court ruled in favor of the transporter, emphasizing that the absence of the downloaded Transit Declaration Form was a technicality not justifying ... Detention of goods - non-submission of Transit Declaration Form - Held that: - at the time of seizure neither the applicant nor the authorities appears to be aware of the amendment. At that point of time the downloaded Transit Declaration Form was the prescribed document for the aforesaid transit. However, it can also not be said that the goods were being transported by the transporter without any document at all - merely in absence of the downloaded Transit Declaration Form it cannot be said that the transporter did not possess any valid document to arrive at the conclusion that the goods were being transported from the outside the State of U.P. only for Sale in U.P. - revision allowed - goods seized shall be released upon furnishing the security other than cash or bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the seizing authority to the extent of demand raised i.e. ₹ 4,95,000/- - decided partly in favor of revisionist. Issues:1. Interpretation of transit declaration form requirement under Value Added Tax Act.2. Validity of documents possessed by the transporter.3. Legal implications of the transporter possessing a photostat copy of the transit declaration form.4. Impact of subsequent amendment to the Value Added Tax Act on the case.5. Justification for the seizure and release of goods.6. Provision for further transportation of goods and penalty proceedings.Interpretation of Transit Declaration Form Requirement:The case involved the transporter's possession of a downloaded Transit Declaration Form as required for transporting goods from outside the State of U.P. The contention was that the form was necessary for entry into U.P. until the rules were amended. The court noted that the transporter had other relevant documents like invoices and Form No.-IX from Bihar, indicating the goods were meant for outside U.P. The absence of the downloaded form was considered a technicality not justifying seizure.Validity of Documents Possessed:The transporter had various documents supporting the transportation of telecom equipment, including invoices and Bihar VAT rules form. Despite not having the downloaded Transit Declaration Form, the court found that these documents sufficiently proved the goods were intended for delivery outside U.P., justifying the release of the seized goods.Legal Implications of Possessing Photostat Copy:The transporter presented a photostat copy of the required form due to technical issues with downloading. Authorities did not accept this explanation, leading to seizure. The court, however, deemed the objection too technical and allowed the release of goods upon furnishing security, considering the transporter's possession of other valid documents.Impact of Subsequent Amendment:An amendment to the Value Added Tax Act required specific documents with consignments, but rules prescribing these documents were not framed. The court highlighted that the amendment was not known to the transporter or authorities at the time of seizure, emphasizing that the downloaded form was the prescribed document then, despite not being part of any formal rule.Justification for Seizure and Release of Goods:The court found the objection raised against the transporter too technical to warrant seizure, especially considering the presence of other valid documents. Consequently, the court allowed the release of goods upon furnishing security, clarifying that the transporter could download the Transit Declaration Form for further transportation.Provision for Further Transportation and Penalty Proceedings:The judgment allowed the release of goods upon furnishing security and permitted the transporter to download the required form for continued transportation. However, it cautioned that the order would not prejudice any penalty proceedings that might be initiated against the transporter, ensuring a fair and comprehensive resolution of the case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
