2016 (8) TMI 135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te Limited, Surajpur, Noida and M/s Madrsan Auto Motive Elesto Technology, Kanchipuram, both the entities being situate in the State of Tamil Nadu. It appears that the vehicle carrying the aforesaid goods was apprehended on 9 April 2011 when the inspection team found that they were not accompanied by Form - 38. Upon receipt of notices, the revisionist is stated to have submitted a reply of the same date along with which the relevant Form - 38's were also forwarded to the Assistant Commissioner. The Assistant Commissioner however did not accept the explanation submitted and accordingly proceeded to pass an order of seizure providing that the goods would be liable to be released upon furnishing of security to the extent of 40 per cent. Th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....this Court in Cheema Paper Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. Lkn 2012 NTN (Vol. 49) 139 It is his submission that the judgment noted above is an authority for the proposition that no seizure can be effected in no man's land. Insofar as the second submission is concerned, Sri Gupta has placed reliance upon another judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge in M/S Balaji Timbers & Paints Vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. Lucknow 2010 NTN (Vol. 43) 53. Sri Gupta submits that once the Form 38's were forwarded along with the show cause notice, no ground warranted the seizure of goods. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that neither of the two submissions noted above commend acceptance. Insofar ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... This judgment is not an authority for the proposition that the power to effect a seizure cannot be exercised in no mans land. That takes us to the second submission of Sri Gupta, namely, that once Form -38's had been duly submitted, there was no justification in effecting a seizure of goods. It becomes relevant to note here that under sub-section (4), the officer authorized is empowered to undertake a search or inspection of goods which have been transported within the State and to apprehend them if he finds that they are not covered by proper and genuine documents. The Act then enjoins the authorized person to call upon the assessee to show cause before proceeding to record his satisfaction that an attempt has been made to evade as....