TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 677
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have their branches at Bangalore, Ernakulam, Chennai and in other places in India. The petitioner's branch in Bangalore, in the course of its business, wanted to stock transfer air conditioner parts and coolant oil to other branch in Ernakulam. Thus, through a Stock Transfer Memo bearing No.0300054 dated 24.03.2017, Bangalore branch valued such stock transfer at Rs. 23,21,558/-, uploaded the details of such transfer in Karnataka Commercial Taxes Department to generate e-sugam, obtained e-sugam No.21325701534 and noted the same in the stock transfer memo dated 24.03.2017. A e-Consignment Declaration under the Kerala Value Added Tax was also generated. Thus, the goods were despatched on 24.03.2017. They have to cross the State of Tamilnad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....76 of 2015 dated 07.01.2016, W.P.No.20634 of 2016 dated 23.06.2016 and W.P.No.1713 of 2016 dated 24.06.2016, arising out of similar circumstances wherein this court directed the release of the goods on payment of Rs. 2000/- towards composition fee. 4. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, based on instructions, submitted that the goods were detained, since the consignor viz., the petitioner did not produce the transit pass at the exit point of this state. Therefore, he contended that as per Section 70(1)(c) of the TN VAT Act, 2006, the goods carried by the petitioner shall be deemed to have been sold within the state of Tamilnadu and consequently, the petitioner is liable to pay tax and compoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch difficulties and the harassment met out by the transporters, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes issued such circular, by clearly giving certain instructions therein to the officials of the Commercial Taxes Department, as to how to deal with the matters like the one on hand. The said authority, after taking note of the decision made by the Apex Court in the case of Tvl.Sodhi Transport Co. and another vs Uttar Pradesh and another, reported in (1986) 62 STC 381, has specifically observed at paragraph Nos.7. (e), (f) and (g) as follows: 7. (e) Regarding acceptance of other documentary evidences in lieu of surrendering Transit Pass, the Honourable Supreme Court, in the case of Tvl.Sodhi Transport Co. and another vs Uttar Pradesh a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the fact that the said provision of law deals with the issue of transit pass and the consequences of non production of the same. 10. No doubt, the learned Government Advocate strongly relied on Section 70(1)(c) of the TN VAT Act, 2006 to support the impugned order of detention. For the purpose of appreciating his contention, it is better to understand the scope of such provision, which reads as follows: 70. Issue of transit pass .--(1) (a) When a goods vehicle carrying any goods mentioned in the Sixth Schedule, coming from any place outside the State and bound for any other place outside the State, passes through the State, the owner or other person in-charge of such goods vehicle shall obtain a transit pass in the prescribed fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....med to be the owner of the goods vehicle. 11. True, Section 70(1)(c) of the Act contemplates deemed sale of the goods carried, if the owner or other person in-charge of the goods fails to produce the transit pass in the prescribed form. In my considered view, the deemed sale contemplated under the above said provision cannot be an irrebuttable presumption and on the other hand, such presumption made only because of non furnishing of transit pass, is always a rebuttable one, if the owner or other person in-charge of the goods, is in a position to satisfy the authorities with other documents legally valid and reliable, to substantiate that the goods are being transferred from one state to another state, through the state of Tamilnadu, not ....