PALRIWAL HYDROCARBONS CHEMICALS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXES KHARAGPUR RANGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated September 21, 2004 passed by the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal, hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal", in R.N. 384 of 2004.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner may briefly be stated as follows: The petitioner No. 1 is a company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The said petitioner purchased two Tata Diesel Vehicles under two invoices, both dated August 10, 2004, at a price of Rs. 9,76,456 each. M/s. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. was the financier for the purchase of the said two vehicles. The said two vehicles were delivered by delivery challans, both dated August 10, 2004 and two sales certificates, both dated August 10, 2004 by M/s. Mithila Motors Ltd. Temporary certificate of registration was granted in respect of the said two vehicles as required under the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioners fixed two second hand tankers on the said two vehicles for using the same for transporting goods. This was followed by permanent registration with the Motor Vehicle Authority of Jharkhand. Two permanent registration Nos. JH-01J/0934 and JH-01J/0933 were allotted to the said two vehicles. Certificates of fitness were also issued for temporary period from August 28, 2004 to August 27, 2005. Temporary permits were issued in respect of the said two vehicles for plying within the State of Jharkhand for the period from September 2, 2004 to December 30, 2004. Another temporary permit was subsequently issued for plying the vehicles from Ranchi to Calcutta for the period from September 5, 2004 to October 2, 2004. Temporary tax tokens were also issued. The said two tankers were insured with the United India Assurance Co. Ltd. The financier issued two separate letters, both dated August 11, 2004, to the petitioner No. 1 giving details for repayment of the loan amount in respect of purchase of the said two vehicles. Within a short time the tankers were found to be defective having leakages. Those were, thus, required to be replaced.

(3.) On September 9, 2004 the said two trucks reached Kharagpur Range Office. The respondent No. 2, being Commercial Tax Officer, intercepted the said two trucks and directed the drivers to produce documents for bringing the said two trucks within the State of West Bengal. The drivers produced permanent registration certificates. It was submitted before the State authority that the trucks, being permanently registered, no way-bill is required for entering into the State of West Bengal. But by order dated September 9, 2004 the said respondent seized the two trucks alleging that the tankers have been removed though the trucks have been registered as tankers and there is no way-bills in respect of the said two vehicles. The respondent No. 2, in absence of any endorsed waybill, was of the view that the drivers had mala fide intention to evade payment of tax. After seizure, two seizure receipts were given to the drivers of the said two vehicles. Being aggrieved with such seizure, applications under Section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act was filed before the Tribunal. The matter came up for hearing before the Tribunal on September 9, 2004. The Tribunal held that the seizure of the two vehicles is lawful and directed that the penalty proceeding arising out of such seizure may proceed and the authority concerned had been directed to pass a reasoned order in respect of the same.