1996 (9) TMI 575

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ransport was through M/s. Ajantha Transport Co. (P) Ltd. The goods were accompanied by the essential documents. But, the second respondent detained the goods and issued exhibit P7 notice under section 29A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The grounds for detention are: (1) The date noted in the delivery note is March 1, 1996 and the reason for delay in despatch is not explained. (2) Though the goods were consigned from Kottayam to Calcutta, the vehicle was intercepted at Podiyedi on the way to Kayamkulam and the change of route was not explained. Hence evasion was suspected.   2.. On receipt of exhibit P7, petitioner got release of the goods on executing bank guarantee for an amount of Rs. 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is fairly a long order. Therefore a delay of few days has taken place for preparing the typed copy of the order and sending it to the assessee. But on June 18, 1996, the bank has been intimated to release the amount covered by the bank guarantee in view of the order imposing penalty. This was a short letter and therefore it was prepared immediately and sent to the bank. On receipt of the intimation from the third respondent, the bank released the amount and it has been remitted as per demand draft dated June 19, 1996. This has been done also for the reason that as per the convention two weeks prior information should be given for encashing the bank guarantee covering higher amounts. Further the bank guarantee is to expire on July 7, 1996....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng the bank guarantee. Counsel further elaborated his arguments by submitting that the order is liable to be appealed against and the third respondent had fallen into a legal error by his over enthusiasm and this has adversely affected the petitioner. 5.. Under the proviso to section 29A(2) of the Act the officer may allow the goods to be transported on the owner of the goods or his representative or the driver or other person in-charge of the vehicle or vessel executing a bond with or without sureties for securing the amount due as security. Thereafter, the officer detaining the goods has to enquire about the question whether there has been attempt to evade tax. Under sub-section (4) of section 29A, after enquiry and after hearing the o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... releasing the goods. On the other hand, what the provisions say is that the goods can be released after executing a security bond with or without surety.   7.. In this case we find that the order imposing penalty, according to the third respondent was passed on June 15, 1996. Annexure P3 does not show when it was communicated to the petitioner. On the same day, i.e., on June 15, 1996, the third respondent intimates the bank to enforce the bank guarantee and by letter dated June 19, 1996, the bank informs the petitioner that the amount has been paid to the department. The explanation given by the third respondent is that annexure P3 is a long order. Further, he states that the bank guarantee will expire on July 7, 1996 and hence he ....