LAWS(MAD)-2012-7-327

RASAMAL FUEL CENTRE Vs. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER

Decided On July 24, 2012
RASAMAL FUEL CENTRE Appellant
V/S
DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) IT has been stated that the petitioner is a dealer in Petroleum products. The petitioner was granted dealership of a retail outlet for the sale of petrol/High Speed Diesel Oil, as per the Dispensing Pump and Selling License Agreement, dated 18.4.2005, entered into between the petitioner and the respondent Corporation. As such, the petitioner has been carrying on the business, as per the terms and conditions of the said agreement, without any complaint. While so, on 3.11.2010, the officers attached to the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial (CT), Enforcement, Chennai, had seized the Tank Truck, bearing registration No.TN.21 F7116, used for transporting MS/HSD loads to the petitioner's retail outlet. The Commercial Tax Enforcement Department had served a goods detention notice, under Form No.41, on the petitioner, on the ground that MS/HSD was being transferred to the Tank Truck belonging to the petitioner, from another Tank Truck, bearing registration No.TN02 R1390. The MS/HSD load was being transferred into the Tank Truck bearing registration No.TN21 F7116, even though the consignment was meant to be transported to M/s.Venkateswara Agencies, Karasur, Puducherry.

(3.) IT has been further stated that the petitioner had received a show cause notice, dated 15.11.2010, from the third respondent, asking the petitioner to submit its explanation, in respect of the charges mentioned in the said show cause notice, with the available documentary evidence, on or before 22.11.2011. On receipt of the show cause notice issued by the third respondent, the petitioner had written a letter, dated 20.11.2010, denying the charges levelled against it. In the reply letter, the petitioner had stated the facts relating to the events that had taken place, on 3.11.2010 and 4.11.2010. However, the second respondent, by his letter, dated 3.2.2011, had informed the petitioner that the Tank Truck belonging to the petitioner, bearing registration No.TN21 F7116, had been blacklisted by the second respondent Corporation, and the petitioner should explain the circumstances under which the vehicle was found to be involved in the incident concerned.