V.V.S. RAO

1. The four revision cases under Section 22(1) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 (the Act) are filed by the State against the common order dated 14.12.1998 passed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). M/s. Vizovolie Chakasang of Nagaland (hereafter, the consignor) is the respondent in TRC Nos. 151 and 248 of 1999. M/s. Bikaner Assam Road Lines, Vijayawada (hereafter, the transporter or BARL) is the respondent in TRC Nos. 184 and 249 of 1999. By the impugned common order, the Tribunal allowed the Tax Appeals filed by the respondents and set aside the common order passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Kakinada as well as the two confiscation orders passed by the Commercial Tax Officer (Intelligence), Vijayawada and Commercial Tax Officer, Kasibugga. The writ petition is filed by consignor for direction to pay the value of the goods confiscated.

Background facts

(i) The Special Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Vijayawada (the Special ACTO) intercepted the lorry No. AP 16T 6489 on 07.5.1993. It was found transporting cloves allegedly sold and sent by the consignor to a purchaser at Delhi. Having found interpolations in the waybills, the Special ACTO issued notices, in response to which the transporter sent reply admitting that the transit pass is not available. Therefore the stock was seized on 21.5.1993. On the same date, the CTO (Intelligence), Vijayawada inspected go downs of the BARL and seized 2250 bags of cloves (each bag weighing 40 Kgs). The documents revealed that goods were on transport from Dimapur to Delhi to M/s. Ram Niwas and Co., (hereafter, first consignee). They were consigned by a person who is not a registered dealer. Hence, the CTO (Intelligence) proposed to confiscate the goods under Section 28(6) of the Act. He issued a show cause notice to BARL, the consignor and the first consignee. The General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder of the consignor filed objections on 08.6.1993. A contention was raised that Section 28(6) of the Act has no application as the goods are in transit and passing through the State of Andhra Pradesh. Though notice was served on the first consignee, he did not file objections but sought fifteen days time for filing a representation. The CTO, Vijayawada conducted enquiry during which he recorded statements of the owners of the lorries who transported the cloves to the godowns. An officer of the department went to Dimapur and conducted enquiry. It was found that the consignor was not available in the address given on the sale bills issued by the Nagaland Forest Officials. The CTO, therefore, on a overall consideration of the matter came to the conclusion that the consignor without any registration under the Nagaland Sales Tax Act had been clandestinely bringing the goods to the State of Andhra Pradesh, storing them in the godowns of BARL who is their agent and effecting the sales without paying sales tax. Accordingly he ordered to confiscate the entire quantity of cloves. The consignor and the transporter filed separate appeals before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur.

(ii) The CTO, Kasibugga after receiving information from the superiors inspected three godowns of BARL situated at Ichchapuram and seized 1894 bags of cloves vide proceedings dated 25.9.1993. After making necessary enquiries, the CTO issued notice dated 09.6.1993 proposing confiscation of the stock. The GPA of the consignor appeared and objected. They claimed that this consignment was being transported to M/s. Babulal Omprakash at Bombay (hereinafter, second consignee). After conducting enquiry, the CTO passed a confiscation order dated 16.7.1993. The contentions and objections raised by consignor as well as transporter were the same. Aggrieved consignor and the transporter filed appeals before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, Kakinada.

(iii) The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes vide proceedings dated 02.8.1993 transferred the two sets of appeals to the Appe