https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160918 Provisions regulating check-post verification and anti-evasion control in the movement of goods were upheld as a valid measure to prevent tax avoidance. Sub-section (4) was treated as a limited verification power with a seven-day maximum enquiry period; sub-section (8) was accepted as a discretionary procedure with hearing and security-based release safeguards; sub-section (10) was sustained as a deterrent against collusion, subject to hearing and prior approval; and sub-section (11) was treated as a permissible presumption where basic consignor and consignee details were not furnished. The writ petitions were also declined because an efficacious statutory appellate remedy was available, leaving the petitioners to pursue that remedy. en-us Wed, 10 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Dec 2019 15:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160918 Provisions regulating check-post verification and anti-evasion control in the movement of goods were upheld as a valid measure to prevent tax avoidance. Sub-section (4) was treated as a limited verification power with a seven-day maximum enquiry period; sub-section (8) was accepted as a discretionary procedure with hearing and security-based release safeguards; sub-section (10) was sustained as a deterrent against collusion, subject to hearing and prior approval; and sub-section (11) was treated as a permissible presumption where basic consignor and consignee details were not furnished. The writ petitions were also declined because an efficacious statutory appellate remedy was available, leaving the petitioners to pursue that remedy. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 10 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160918