AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.C. Mohapatra, J.—This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Petitioner No. 1 is a company having its registered office in Bombay and a business office in Calcutta. It entered into an agreement with the National Aluminium Company Limited for setting up a complete 132 KV switch-yard and for the purpose of execution of the agreement it was to supply materials and make constructions. In order to fulfil the said agreement, petitioner No. 1 transported to the project site various machineries and materials. The officer-in-charge of Jamsola Ghat Check-gate demanded undertakings from the petitioner No. 1 for transporting the articles. There is no provision for giving undertaking under the Orissa Sales Tax Act or the Rules made thereunder. The Commissioner is also not authorised under the statute to issue direction for giving undertaking. The officer-in-charge of the check-gate seized some articles being transported as no undertaking was furnished by the petitioner No. 1.
It is not in dispute before us that the articles were being transported for the purpose of execution of the agreement with National Aluminium Company Limited. The transaction in respect of those goods, when completed would be considered for regular assessment under the Orissa Sales Tax Act or any other Act. When the object of the transport of the articles, the person transporting and the destination to which the same were being transported were known and it is not claimed that false statement was being made before the check-gate Officer, there was no justification for seizure of the goods merely because power is vested under the statute. Where, however, the facts disclosed by the petitioner No. 1 would have been disbelieved, the matter would have stood on a different footing.
In the circumstance, the impugned annexures are quashed and the writ application is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
H.L. Agrawal, C.J.
I agree.