TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (10) TMI 885
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Section 54 (1) of the Act, for intention to evade the tax. The notice states that the Form 38 accompanying the import of 'Urad' dal from outside the State was incomplete, inasmuch as the Column no.6 of the Form did not mention the bill/cash memo/chalan/tax envoices number and the date, nor does the form disclose the details of the goods including its weight/quantity, price, the name of the seller, Tin number and the name of driver of the vehicle. The notice states that since the Form were not complete, it appears that the petitioner had intention to use Form 38, repeatedly and intended to evade the payment of tax. Instead of showing the cause and pursuing remedies provided under the Act, the petitioner has approached this Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are materially different. It cannot be said that there is any assumption underlying therein that the goods to which the provision of Sectioin 28-A applies has actually been sold inside the State and the section does not authorise the sales tax authorities either to seize the said goods or to penalise the importer thereof on any such assumption. Its present basis is the attempt to evade tax. The power to detain the goods and levy penalty in respect thereof cannot be exercised merely for the reason that the said goods were not accompanied by the requisite documents or that the documents accompanying them were false. This power can be exercised only if the goods detailed are not accompanied by the requisite documents or that the documents acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or any other person. In Multitex Filtration Engineering Ltd. (supra) a learned Single Judge noticed the decision in M/s K.M.G.S. Road Signs Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and held as follows:- "22. In the case of M/s KMGS Road Signs Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, U.P., Lucknow (supra) this Court has upheld the seizure of the goods on the ground that column Nos. 2, 3 and 6 of the declaration form were blank. According to learned Single Judge, column Nos. 2, 3 and 6 are material columns should necessarily be filled. The learned Single Judge has relied upon the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of Suljag Industries vs. CTO (Supra) and in the case of Assistant Commercial Tax Officer vs. Bajaj Electricals Limited (supra). Ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y to be due under this Act has to be made out as a condition precedent. In this view of the matter the observation of the learned Single Judge in the case of M/s KMGS Road Signs Pvt. Ltd. is not correct in entirely and is to be read in the light of the observation made above." Shri S.D. Singh would submit that in para 26 of the judgment in Multitex Filtration Engineering Ltd. (supra) the Court has observed that the blank column no.6 in Form 38 i.e, non-mentioning of challan number or invoice number may lead to an inference that in case of non-checking of goods, the challan may be used for other consignment of same quality, eight, and value. The other columns may not have that importance. In Multitex Filtration Engineering Ltd. (supra) the....