KHURANA ENTERPRISES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri N.C. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned standing counsel for the respondent. This revision has been filed against the order dated July 7, 2014 passed by the Member, Commercial Tax Tribunal, Kanpur Bench-I, Kanpur in Appeal No. 322 of 2014-15 arising from the proceedings under section 48(7) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the present case are that truck No. HR-55-B-0749 was intercepted on June 10, 2014 by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax (Mobile Squad) Unit, Kannauj. It was found that the truck was carrying 600 bags of PVC dana showing in transit declaration form transportation from Delhi to Patna (Bihar). On verification it was found that neither the alleged consignee is a registered dealer nor the Suvidha number shown by the applicant has been generated by the said dealer.

(3.) As per departmental website between June 5, 2014 to June 9, 2014, the applicant had used ten transit declaration form showing sale of PVC dana to alleged purchaser of Bihar for Rs. 1,26,48,000 and out of this seven TDF were used showing sale of Rs. 85,58,000 to the consignee in question, i.e., M/s. Durga Trading. Despite being asked the applicant did not furnish his ID proof. On these facts and also for detail reasons recorded by the assessing authority, the goods in question were seized and cash security of Rs. 6,00,000 was demanded for release of the goods vide seizure order No. 451 dated June 18, 2014. The application under the proviso to section 48(7) filed by the applicant before the Joint Commissioner (SIB), Commercial Tax, Etawah Zone, Etawah, was rejected by the Joint Commissioner vide order dated June 24, 2014. Against this order the applicant filed Appeal No. 322/2014 for the year 2014 before the Member, Commercial Tax, Tribunal, Kanpur Bench-I, Kanpur, which was dismissed by the impugned order dated July 7, 2014.