ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA,J. - (1.) This revision is directed against an order of the Tribunal dated 27.4.2017, requiring the assessee to deposit 10% of the estimated value of goods seized for release of goods.
(2.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that assessee is a registered dealer and goods were being transported from Mathura to Etah. Evidence in the form of a communication dated 21.2.2017 by the purchaser based at Mumbai was brought on record to contend that transaction could not materialise, and that is why goods were being returned. It is also stated that assessee is a registered dealer and in case any liability is fixed, the same can be realized and there was no justification for the authorities to require the revisionist to deposit cash security.
(3.) Learned Standing Counsel submits that materials did exist on record before the authorities to sustain seizure and condition of deposit of 10% amount security is not illegal.;