ANITHA TRADERS Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the dismissal confiscation order passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kurnool in Proceedings No. 01/2006 -07 dated 21 -8 -2006, the appellant filed the present appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(2.) A show cause notice was issued to seize and confiscate the goods and the appellant filed objections and the dealer also personally represented the case on 24 -2 -2006. The ACTO rejected the contentions of the appellant and confirmed the seizure -cum -confiscation order. Against this order, the appellant filed an appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kurnool and Appellate Deputy Commissioner dismissed the appeal and confirmed the confiscation order passed by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (Int), O/o Tirupathi -II Circle, Tirupathi. Against this order, appellant filed an appeal before the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(3.) AT the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the ACTO has no jurisdiction to check and confiscate the goods. He further contended that under Section 45(7)(b) of APVAT Act, the authority can confiscate the goods if in the said vehicle have without any documents or covered by fictitious documents. The appellant while transporting the goods carried the purchase invoices, way bills and no enquiry has been conducted by the department on the statement recorded from the driver who stated that the goods are being transported to Erode (outside state), the burden is on the department to establish it and if any defects noticed, the same ought to have been compounded.