Detention of goods for missing Form JJ attracted only the prescribed penalty, with excess collection held refundable.

Detention of a consignment could not be sustained merely because the consignee had not filed returns. Where Form JJ of the Union Territory of Puducherry did not accompany the goods, the defect attracted only the penalty contemplated in Circular No. 33/2014, namely Rs. 2,000, and not retention of the full amount collected. The goods were described as promotional materials not intended for sale, and that position was not denied. The respondent also failed to identify the legal head for the excess collection or quantify any tax liability. The excess amount retained beyond Rs. 2,000 was therefore refundable to the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent was justified in detaining the consignment and retaining the amount of Rs. 49,095 collected from the petitioner, or whether only Rs. 2,000 could be levied and the balance refunded.

Analysis: The detention could not be sustained on the ground that the consignee had not filed returns. If Form JJ of the Union Territory of Puducherry was not accompanying the consignment, the mistake at best attracted the penalty indicated in Circular No.33/2014 dated 17.07.2014, namely Rs. 2,000. The goods were stated to be promotional materials not intended for sale, and that stand was not denied in the counter affidavit. The respondent also did not clearly specify the head under which the entire amount was collected or quantify any tax liability. The petitioner had already accepted liability only to the extent of Rs. 2,000.

Conclusion: The respondent was not justified in retaining the excess amount, and the petitioner was entitled to refund of Rs. 47,095.

---