2017 (4) TMI 133

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,123/-. 2. The case of the petitioner in short, is as follows:- The petitioner is a registered dealer and carrying on the business in printing since 40 years. Monthly returns are being filed before the third respondent regularly and the sales taxes are remitted without any default. The petitioner imported printing machineries from abroad through Chennai Airport Air Cargo Complex. It is for the petitioner's personal use and utilisation. Therefore, such import of goods does not attract sales tax, since there is no sale or purchase of the goods inside the State of Tamil Nadu. However, the first respondent detained the goods and issued the impugned goods detention notice on 08.03.2017, on the reason that the petitioner had not furnish....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or purchase of goods taken place inside the State of Tamilnadu so as to presume or assume that the petitioner has evaded the payment of tax. He further submitted that the goods are imported by the petitioner directly from the foreign seller and when the goods are imported and utilised by the petitioner for their personal consumption, the question of claiming tax and also imposing penalty does not arise that too by detaining the goods. He further contended that even assuming that there is non disclosure of previous imports made by the petitioner in their returns, still it is for the third respondent to look into that aspect and pass appropriate orders and not for the first respondent to make any conclusion and impose tax and penalty on the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing Authority viz., the third respondent for taking appropriate proceedings against the petitioner, if the allegation made against the petitioner is based on certain materials. 9. In this case, the first respondent claims that the verification of the web site indicates that the petitioner has not disclosed such imports. Therefore, it is for the third respondent to look into this aspect and pass appropriate orders after issuing notice to the petitioner and giving them an opportunity of hearing. 9. Considering the claim of the petitioner that the machinery is imported for the petitioner's personal use and their specific case that there is no sale or purchase taken place inside the State of Tamilnadu, I am of the view that the first ....