TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (3) TMI 894
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. One Gourab Sales Agency of Delhi on the basis of the petitioner's order sent a consignment of different motor parts in 192 packages for which the petitioner duly obtained way bill in form 42 and handed the same over to the driver of vehicle No. WB-03-1851 to enable him to produce the same at Dalkhola check-post at the time of entry into West Bengal. The check-post authority there duly endorsed the way bill and allowed entry into West Bengal. The petitioner unloaded the said goods in his godown at Prakashnagar, Jalpaiguri. On receipt of orders from various parties in Calcutta thereafter, the petitioner loaded the said goods for transporting to his Calcutta office in lorry No. WB-03A-3638 and the driver of the vehicle was handed over road challan, declaration of the said goods as required under rule 214B of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1995. On January 25, 2001 the vehicle was intercepted at Dhubulia near Krishnanagar by the Commercial Tax Officer-respondent No. 1 and after the driver showed the documents, the driver was directed to bring the vehicle at the Sales Tax Directorate Office at 14, Beleghata Road. On January 27, 2001 responde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....here is no evasion of tax, movement of goods by transportation has been subjected to some restrictions and conditions as prescribed in the Rules. Rule 214B prescribes the restrictions and conditions for transporting any consignment of goods from one place in West Bengal to any other place in West Bengal. On the other hand, rule 212 prescribes the procedure for transporting consignment of goods imported or brought into West Bengal and also for such consignment of goods when transported across or beyond a check-post in West Bengal by a road vehicle. This rule 212 prescribes onerous provisions as compared to the one contained in rule 214Binasmuch as production of endorsed way bill in the case of rule 212 is a must, but this is not so in the case of rule 214B. In case of rule 214B the driver is to carry with him only the declaration referred to in sub-rule (1) of that rule and a consignment note, delivery note, invoice, road challan or any other document of like nature. Moreover, under rule 212, there is provision for actual verification of consignment of goods regarding description, quantity, weight or value with the one given in way bill, but in rule 214B there is only provision f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rts or the accessories have been given in the challan. Two consignments covering two packages that were found had not been covered in the challan produced. The total number of packages found was 174 in place of 188 packages as given in the consignment note. There was also information obtained from Dalkhola check-post to the effect that the truck number carrying the said goods did not pass through Dalkhola. The driver also failed to satisfy the authorities showing, in the alternative, purchase of the goods in West Bengal, so that the provision of rule 214B can be made applicable. There was already information that the petitioner had been engaged in importing such goods in clandestine way. That being the case learned State Representative submits that the pre-seizure report dated January 24, 2001, annexure "B" and the report dated January 25, 2001, annexure "A" to the affidavit-in-opposition contains valid and legal ground for detention of the vehicle and of seizure dated January 27, 2001, of the goods since provisions of rule 212 have not been followed. 7.. Having heard the learned advocates as above, we find that the petitioner does not appear to have come with clean hands....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nding authority to examine these questions, if the applicant chooses to place before them this factual question. Only for this purpose, we are setting aside the order dated March 22, 2001, imposing penalty passed by the respondent No. 1. We make it clear that we are not setting aside that order because of any infirmity in it. In view of the admitted importation of those goods into West Bengal and in view of the nonproduction of any way bill in respect of such importation even at the penalty proceedings, the respondent No. 1's refusal to accept the alleged story of movement having originated in Jalpaiguri cannot be called irrational. The resultant non-application of rule 214B is also logical. The contention of Mr. S.K. Chakraborty, learned advocate for the applicant, that respondent No. 1 failed to give proper consideration to the lapse of more than two months between the date of endorsement on the way bill at Dalkhola check-post and the date of seizure is totally misplaced because respondent No. 1 was never told that way bill is in existence and that it was endorsed at Dalkhola check-post. However, in the interest of justice to the applicant we are merely giving him an opportunity ....