TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (8) TMI 264
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for short "the transporters") is also having a truck No. RND 2715. It was intercepted on December 8, 1986 near police station, Sodala by the Flying Squad of the Commercial Taxes Department, which was headed by the Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer. There goods worth more than Rs. 5 lacs were loaded and they were not covered by any of the documents, i.e., goods receipts. A notice was given to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the learned, counsel for the petitioner is that the petitionertransporter was not the owner of the goods and, therefore, he could not be called upon to pay either any tax or the compounding fee and therefore, the order is without jurisdiction. I find no substance in the writ petition. From the facts which are contained in the notice given to the petitioner-transporter as well as his repl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....us and so far as the other goods are concerned they were not covered by any goods receipts whatsoever. It is common knowledge that all transporters as and when they carry goods in the vehicle, all the goods are covered by one or the other goods receipts. Therefore, the very fact that except three goods receipts which were filed after the truck was released the transporter was not carrying any good....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uld be relating to the goods carried which are in possession of such driver or other person in-charge who shall, if so required give his name and address and the name and address of the owner of the vehicle and names and addresses of the consignors and the consignees, if any. Under section 16(9)(b) the case could be compounded by charging the fee which could not exceed more than three times of the....