P.K.SEN,J. - (1.) THIS application under section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, which is in the nature of a writ application, is at the instance of a registered dealer and is directed against purported interception and detention of vehicle No. OR-05d-9015 loaded with various goods by the Commercial Tax Officer, Central Section on November 4, 2000.
(2.) THE petitioner's case is that the above truck was loaded with pepper and it was detained at Howrah and on verification of the way bill along with other documents, the documents were seized. Subsequently respondent No. 1 checked the goods and came to a finding that those were undervalued and the truck was taken to their office and was seized. On being aggrieved by such seizure, the instant application has been filed before this Tribunal. Mr. S. K. Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, has submitted before us that an important question of law is involved in this application inasmuch as, according to him, the order of the Commercial Tax Officer was bad in law and he further submits that when the way bill and other documents were duly endorsed at the Chichira Check-post, the subsequent interception was without jurisdiction.
(3.) MR . Chakraborty further submits that even if there was any undervaluation of the goods, the same was done by the consignor and this petitioner cannot be held liable for such under-invoicing the bill. When the truck loaded with pepper reached Chichira Check-post the driver on demand produced all the papers including the way bill and those were duly endorsed by the checking official and, therefore, any subsequent checking or interception by the officials of the same Directorate is bad and there was no ground for such interception. As against this, the learned State Representative submits that defect, if there be any, has been done away with by recent amendment. In this connection learned State Representative has drawn our attention to sub-rules (10) and (11) of rule 212 which run as follows : " (10) Where, upon verification made under sub-rule (9), and on searching the vehicle or opening the container or packages, if necessary - (a) the description, quantity, weight or value of the goods in any consignment is found by the authority referred to in sub-rule (9) to be at variance with the description, quantity, weight or value of the goods disclosed in the way bill; or (b) the documents presented in respect of the goods in any consignment is found by the authority referred to in sub-rule (9) to be false or incorrect, either in respect of the description, quantity or weight of such consignment of goods, or the value thereof; or (c) the consignor or consignee of the consignment of goods is shown to be a dealer registered under the Act, while the records available in the office of the appropriate assessing authority do not show the existence of such a dealer, such authority shall prepare a report in the presence of the driver or person-in-charge of the vehicle and get such report countersigned by him, or where the driver or person-in-charge of the vehicle is not available for any reason, such authority shall prepare a report in the presence of one witness after explaining to him the contents of the report countersigned by him, and shall, thereafter, seize the consignment of goods under section 70 for contravention of the provisions of section 68. (11) Any infringement of any provision of this rule by a person, casual trader or dealer in respect of any consignment of goods imported or brought into West Bengal by him on his own account or by the driver or person-in-charge of a road vehicle transporting such consignment of goods across or beyond any check-post in West Bengal shall be deemed to be a contravention of the provisions of section 68 by such person, casual trader or dealer himself. " ;