2013 (5) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3 is illegal and bad in law and that the value of the seized goods assessed is excessive. The other revision has been filed by the revenue on the ground that the Tribunal has erred in reducing the estimated value of the seized goods. The goods were going from Delhi to Kathmandu (Nepal) and during transit through U.P. they were detained on 14.3.2013 between Kanpur and Lucknow. A show cause notice dated 15.3.2013 was issued and thereafter on consideration of reply the goods were ordered to be seized vide order dated 25.3.2013. The representation under Section 48(7) of the Value Added Tax Act, 2008 was rejected and thereafter the Tribunal had passed the impugned order upholding the seizure order and directing for the release of the goods....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....neness or as to whether they pertained to the goods in transit. However, it is not necessary for me to dwell on the above two aspects in detail as it is admitted to the parties that the goods were not accompanied by the transit declaration form. The absence of transit declaration form along with the goods is a sufficient good ground to seize the goods. In M/s Castrol India Limited Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Tax 2012 Tax Law Diary 130 it has been held that material produced in response to the show cause notice is required to be considered before passing the seizure order. The transit declaration form was produced in response to the show cause notice therefore, the seizing authority was obliged to consider the same. The transit d....