2016 (2) TMI 843

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....company having its head office at Bangalore and branches elsewhere in the country including Delhi. It is an importer of mobile phones in India. It is a registered dealer under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 ('DVAT Act'). 5. In January 2016 Petitioner No.1 imported 14,880 mobile phones of Chinese origin of Dazen 1 Coolpad. The import was made of two consignments, one of 5000 pieces and the other of 9880 pieces. As regards the 5000 pieces, an invoice was raised by M/s Coolpad Overseas Ltd. on 5th January 2016. On 7th January 2016, invoices were raised with regard to the 9880 pieces. 6. On 11th January 2016, a Bill of Entry ('B/E') was filed with New Custom House, IGI Airport, New Delhi and 5000 mobile phones were cleared after paying c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Petitioner No.1 sought the slots for 'in-warding' of 5000 units of Dazen 1 in Bijwasan Warehouse for 11 pm on 4th February 2016 and in respect of 9880 mobile phones for 11 pm on 5th February 2016 have been placed on record. 10. It is stated that after the slots were confirmed, 5020 pieces were loaded in three tempos. Two of the tempos carrying 2980 pieces reached Bijwasan in the wee hours on 5th February 2016. 11. The third tempo was driven by Petitioner No.2 Mr Bhero Mandal. The said tempo was carrying 2040 pieces. It is stated that at around 10:30 pm this third tempo driven by Petitioner No.2 was stopped by the Value Added Tax Officer ('VATO') (Enf.) and was asked to show the documents in connection with the goods. 12. Ther....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the goods. There are also questions that have been raised by the Petitioner regarding the proper authorization of the VATO (Enf.) who intercepted the tempo carrying the goods. It was sought to be urged that, in terms of Section 68(2) of the DVAT Act, there has to be a specific order of the Commissioner authorising the Additional Commissioner (Enf) to delegate the power to intercept the goods to the VATO (Enf). 14. In the meanwhile, on the basis of the above interception, the VATO (Enf-II) proceeded to issue an "Assessment/Penalty Order" under Section 32 and 33 read with Section 86(19) of the DVAT Act raising a total tax demand plus penalty of Rs. 29,81,579/- on the driver i.e. Petitioner No. 2. Clearly, with Petitioner No.1 having come f....