RAJDHANI EXPRESS AND TRANSPORT Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE all the writ petitions raise a common question of law and fact they are being disposed of by this common order. Brief facts of said writ petitions are as follows:

(2.) BY this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondent no. 2 to release the vehicle no. RJ -14 -G -1588 along with the goods and documents seized on 28.12.1994 and prays that the respondent no. 2 be directed not to impose any penalty under Section. 22A(7) of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act and quash such penalty order if passed during the pendency of the writ petition. It has also been prayed that may be held that the respondents are not entailed to intercept and seize the vehicle and goods which are merely passing through the State of Rajasthan and guidelines may be laid down for the authorities of the Commercial Taxes Department for exercise of their powers under Section 22A of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act.

(3.) REPLY has been filed on behalf of the respondents along with documents Ex. R -1 to R -22 stating that at the time of checking the Driver Ashok Kumar who is incharge of the vehicle and goods was having challan no. 1682 dt. 27.12.1994 of M/s. Rajdhani Express Transport Co. Jaipur showing the transportation of goods from Delhi to Jaipur and was also having three goods receipt showing the names of the consignors and consignees of Delhi and Jaipur respectively. It has been stated that the Driver was also having challan no. 1681 dt. 27.12.1994 of M/s. Rajdhani Express Transport Co. Jaipur showing the transportation of goods from Delhi to Bombay showing the names of the consignors and consignees of Delhi and Bombay respectively and was having sales voucher /bills of the sellers. It has been stated that the writ petition is not maintainable on the ground that the goods were transported on the basis of false and bogus documents and that the petitioner has misstated the facts. It has also been stated that the petitioner is using his transport business for evasion.of the sales tax which is prima facie apparent from the documents produced with the reply.