https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104009 Rule 89A(2) requiring the consignor to issue a prescribed declaration in duplicate and the transporter or consignee to carry and produce it was a valid transport-control measure under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The Court treated the requirement as a statutory mechanism to prevent evasion of sales tax on notified goods, not as an unreasonable or oppressive burden on dealers. The Tribunal's narrower clarification on non-production of the declaration was considered impractical and was not accepted. The challenge to the rule therefore failed, and the transport-declaration condition was upheld as lawful. en-us Fri, 23 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Sep 2013 10:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104009 Rule 89A(2) requiring the consignor to issue a prescribed declaration in duplicate and the transporter or consignee to carry and produce it was a valid transport-control measure under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941. The Court treated the requirement as a statutory mechanism to prevent evasion of sales tax on notified goods, not as an unreasonable or oppressive burden on dealers. The Tribunal's narrower clarification on non-production of the declaration was considered impractical and was not accepted. The challenge to the rule therefore failed, and the transport-declaration condition was upheld as lawful. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 23 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=104009