- (1.) BY means of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the seizure order dated August 29, 2007 passed under Section 13A(6) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') annexure 1 to the writ petition. After seizing the goods on the value of Rs. 18,03,750, a sum of Rs. 4,32,900 has been demanded towards security.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered dealer under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of manufacture and sales of deshi ghee in its factory situated at Aligarh. It is claimed that the petitioner had sale depots in different States across the country and used to transfer the manufactured goods by way of stock transfer for sale. On August 21, 2007 the petitioner dispatched 925 tins of deshi ghee to its depot Bhiwandi, District Thane (Maharashtra) against stock transfer note No. 00189 dated August 21, 2007. The Bilty No. 5369 dated August 21, 2007 for the transportation of the goods has also been prepared for the transportation of the goods. When the goods was in transit, the Assistant Commissioner, (Mobile Squad) Unit II, Trade Tax, Agra, intercepted the vehicle loaded with the aforesaid goods on August 21, 2007 at 11.50 P.M. and for the purposes of the verification, the goods was detained and a detention memo was issued. The petitioner filed reply to the detention memo and submitted therein that the goods was being dispatched by way of stock transfer to its depot. It was submitted that 9R was not obtained because there was no sale but the dispatch of the goods by way of stock transfer to the depot. Thereafter, a show -cause notice was issued on August 23, 2007. The petitioner filed reply to the show -cause notice. In the reply, it was stated that the stock register is being produced which is certified by the Registrar, Mandi Samiti, Aligarh. It was further stated that the transactions were duly recorded in the stock register and there was no case of suppression of the turnover. Copies of the stock register were also filed. It was also explained that 9R could not be obtained because it was not a case of sale but stock transfer. The Assistant Commissioner, Trade Tax, Agra however has not accepted the plea of the petitioner and vide impugned seizure order dated August 29, 2007 seized the goods. The goods have been mainly seized on the ground that the petitioner could not obtain 9R prescribed under the Mandi Adhiniyam in respect of the transaction and it has been inferred that the entry of such transaction was doubtful in the books of account. Counter -affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parties.
(3.) HEARD Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal, Senior Advocate, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel.;