Notified check-post requirement limits transit seizure powers under VAT law; administrative arrangements cannot create statutory jurisdiction.

Powers to seize goods in transit and impose penalty under section 68 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 attach only to the officer-in-charge of a check-post or barrier lawfully notified under section 68(1). A mobile checking arrangement created by administrative letter cannot replace the statutory requirement of a notified check-post or barrier. As the acting officer was not in charge of a duly notified check-post or barrier, the seizure memo and show cause notice issued under section 68(4) and section 68(5) lacked legal authority and were unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commercial Tax Officer had jurisdiction under section 68(4) and section 68(5) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 to seize the goods and issue the show cause notice in the absence of a check-post or barrier notified in accordance with section 68(1) of the Act.

Analysis: The power to seize goods in transit and to impose penalty under section 68 is vested in the officer-in-charge of a check-post or barrier. Section 68(1) requires the State Government to set up check-posts or erect barriers by notification in the Official Gazette. A mobile checking arrangement created by administrative letter cannot substitute the statutory requirement of a notified check-post or barrier. Since the officer who acted against the petitioner was not an officer-in-charge of a duly notified check-post or barrier, the exercise of power under section 68(4) and section 68(5) lacked legal authority.

Conclusion: The seizure memo and the show cause notice were without jurisdiction and could not be sustained. The action was illegal and liable to be quashed, with release of the truck and goods.

Ratio Decidendi: Powers of seizure and penalty under section 68 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 can be exercised only by the officer-in-charge of a check-post or barrier lawfully notified under section 68(1); administrative arrangements cannot confer such statutory jurisdiction.

---