ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) Heard learned Standing Counsel as well as Sri N.C. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent.
(2.) Following orders were passed in the matter while entertaining this revision on 2.5.2017:- "It is submitted that goods in excess of what was declared was being transported, and as such was not backed by the declaration warranted in terms of the circular issued under Section 52 of the Act, and therefore, the Tribunal has erred in directing release of goods, without deposit of security. Issue notice. Steps be taken by registered speed post, within a week. List after service of notice. Till the next date of listing, effect and operation of the order of Tribunal, dated 12.4.2017, shall be kept in abeyance."
(3.) Perusal of the record goes to show that goods allegedly transported from Delhi to Rewa were intercepted at Mathura. It was found that goods far in excess of what was disclosed in TDF-1 were being transported and that consignee and consignor were also not found to be in existence. An order of seizure was consequently passed. The authorities directed the revisionist to deposit 40% of the value of goods towards cash security for release of goods. The transporter approached the Tribunal with the grievance that only 20 undeclared items were being transported. It is contended that existence of consignee and consignor is not a relevant issue, particularly as the transporter has no means to verify their identity. The Tribunal accepted such contention and has directed release of goods without any security. Against this order, revenue is before this Court.;