PANKAJ GUPTA Vs. SALES TAX OFFICER, SILIGURI RANGE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, as it appears from the petition, despatched 16,040 kgs. of Formalin (in short, "disputed consignment") worth of Rs. 2,50,224 to M/s. Mohata Udyog at Mathabhanga, Cooch Behar by vehicle No. WB -11A/8355 under challan No. ATC/030/2008 -09 dated May 25, 2008. The vehicle was intercepted at Ghoshpukur Check Point (in short, "GPCP") on May 28, 2008 at about 6 am. On demand, the driver of the vehicle failed to produce tax invoice along with the challan referred to hereinabove. The vehicle along with the disputed consignment was detained vide detention order No. 118/GPCP dated May 28, 2008 for violation of rule 107(2) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (in short, "the VAT Rules").

(2.) SEIZURE receipt vide seizure case No. GPCP/65/08 -09 dated May 29, 2008 was handed over to the driver of the vehicle. Notice in form 60 calling for objection against imposition of penalty under Section 11 of the VAT Act was also served on the driver on the same date, i.e., on May 29, 2008 fixing the date of hearing on June 26, 2008. On the basis of an early hearing petition, moved on behalf of the petitioner by an Advocate, the case was taken up for hearing on May 30, 2008. The STO/GPCP was not satisfied with the explanations given during the course of hearing and came to the conclusion that had the vehicle not been intercepted at GPCP, there was enough scope and opportunity to evade payment of taxes. He estimated the value of the consignment at Rs. 2,88,720 against the disclosed value of Rs. 2,50,224 and imposed a penalty of Rs. 86,616 calculated at 30 per cent on the estimated value. Order dated May 30, 2008 of STO/GPCP was challenged by the petitioner before the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Siliguri Range (in short, "ACCT/SGR") in revision case No. R/AC/10/SGR/08 -09. Disregarding the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, ACCT/SGR by his order dated June 4, 2008 confirmed the order of seizure as well as the order of imposition of penalty.

(3.) THE petitioner, Shri Pankaj Gupta, proprietor of Archi Trading Company having office at 59, Bonbehari Bose Road, Howrah, in this petition filed under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987, has challenged the order of seizure dated May 29, 2008 passed by the STO/SGR, imposition of penalty made under order dated May 30, 2008 of STO/SGR and the revisional order dated June 4, 2008 of ACCT/SGR.