- (1.) The petitioner, a registered partnership firm, carryingbusiness as a transporter, approach the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal with the following grievances : On March 9, 2004 when the vehicle being No. HR37J-6937, loaded with goods was approaching Andal, respondent No. 1 intercepted the truck at Kajore at about 3 p.m. On being asked the driver produced the relevant documents like invoices, consignment notes and the way bills. Respondent No. 1 took possession of the said documents and directed the truck to be brought to Durgapur Range office for physical verification of the goods and the documents. The respondent No. 1 issued a detention order dated March 9, 2004. On March 10, 2004 respondent No. 1 gave a seizure receipt to the driver of the vehicle after seazing the goods which included 28 bundles of fibre glass sheets for which there was no coverage in the bills ; zip rolls and I.S. core which were of different quantity from what was mentioned in the bill. It was alleged that all the goods were undervalued and there was a previous seizure case against the consignor. The goods were seized under Section 70 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 for being allegedly transported in violation of Section 68 of the said Act. Penalty proceeding was started and the respondent No. 1 by order dated March 11, 2004 imposed penalty of Rs. 1,94,670.
(2.) The petitioner by filing an application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987 challenged the seizure as well as the order of penalty. It was contended before the learned Tribunal that there was no fibre glass sheets but there were only PVC sheets which were duly mentioned in the documents. It was denied that there was any variation in the quantity of zip rolls and I.S. core or that there had been any under-valuation. The learned Tribunal by the impugned order dated March 25, 2004 dismissed the application and gave liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy against the order of penalty.
(3.) Being aggrieved by the said order of the learned Tribunal the petitioner/appellant approached the court praying for setting aside the order of seizure as well as the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal.;