V.K.Mehrotra, J. - (1.) On the night between 4th and 5th September, 1981, a truck bearing registration No. MPU-6238 was intercepted at the Kotwan Check Post established by the sales tax department and it was discovered that 600 cases of different varieties of Indian-made foreign liquor were being carried under an invoice issued by M/s. Shaw Wallace & Company Limited (petitioner No. 2) from Kanpur and were meant for M/s. Jain & Company. From the documents provided by the transport company covering this consignment it appeared that the consignment was loaded at Rampur in the State of U.P.
(2.) On 15th September, 1982, a show cause notice was served by the Sales Tax Officer, Special Investigation Branch, Agra, upon M/s. Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd., Rampur. According to this show cause notice, the value of the aforesaid consignment of 500 cases of Indian-made foreign liquor was disclosed at Rs. 62,525 and as per the statement of a representative of M/s. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. On 10th September, 1981, at the time of a survey made by the sales tax department, the delivery of the consignment had been taken in Rampur itself which created a doubt that the purchase had been made by M/s. Shaw Wallace and Company in the State itself and the value of the consignment had been shown at "too low a figure in the invoice. It was said that the value of the consignment was at an average of Rs. 370 per case. M/s. Shaw Wallace and Company were asked to show cause why the consignment should not be seized and further proceedings permissible in law be taken against it treating the average value of the consignment to be Rs. 370 per case.
(3.) The case of the petitioners, of which petitioner No. 1 is M/s. Shaw Scott Distilleries (P.) Limited and petitioner No. 2 is M/s. Shaw Wallace and Company Limited, is that the consignment was in transit from Rampur, in the course of an inter-State sale made by the first petitioner through its selling agent, namely, M/s. Shaw Wallace and Company, to M/s. Jain and Company, Bhopal and further that all the relevant documents were available with the consignment and that the price shown in the invoice was correctly shown as the remaining amount of charges were to be paid by the consignee. Some further grounds were put forward as justification for the price actually shown in the invoice. The petitioners also asserted that the provisions of Section 28-A of the U.P. Sales Tax Act were not attracted nor was the detention of the goods permissible under Section 13-A of the Act. They prayed that the consignment be released forthwith. When the respondents which includes the functionaries of the sales tax department of Uttar Pradesh as well as the State of U.P. failed to give relief to the petitioners, the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in this Court. While admitting the writ petition to a fuller hearing, this Court passed an order on 24th September, 1981, on the application made by the petitioners for an interim order directing the respondents to release the goods and the truck seized by them. No conditions were imposed upon the petitioners while passing this order.;