Tamal Sengupta vs State Of Tripura And Ors

Heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Bhattacharya, learned Government Advocate for the respondents on advance copy.

The petitioner is a transporter. The petitioner's transport vehicle was detained and later on along with the goods seized by the authorities on the ground that the same carried partially goods without payment of duty. The case of the petitioner is that even after paying full amount of duty with penalty as demanded by the respondents the vehicle is not released. According to the petitioner the department has under letter dated 20th November, 2019 written by the Superintendent of State Tax cited the reason that the vehicle was carrying phensedyl, a narcotic drug for not releasing the vehicle. The same letter mentions that the vehicle with the banned drug is already handed over to the police authorities.

The short prayer in this petition in this background is that the state tax authorities must at least supply to the petitioner the list of seized goods as also the undeclared taxable goods and the goods against which the department has imposed and recovered penalty.

Insofar as the case of the respondents of the vehicle carrying the banned drug is concerned, surely the law will take its own course. However the request of the petitioner for supplying the above mentioned documents, is justifiable.

Under the circumstances, the respondents shall provide to the petitioner following details :

(i) The seizure memo under which the vehicle in question with the goods was seized.

(ii) The list of undeclared taxable goods.

(iii) The goods for which the penalty has been imposed and recovered.

This shall be done within a period of two weeks from today.

Petition is disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.