Baby Saha v. The State Of Tripura And ORS




 

     

 !" # $
wife
of
Shri
Nidul
Saha,
resident
of
Math
Chowmuhani
Bazar,
Lane
No.2,
Agartala,
P.S.
East
Agartala,
District
-
West
Tripura

 %%



&

'&( )*&(+,+) #&

&( -,( $. ( /
represented
by
the
Secretary,
to
the
Revenue
Department,
Government
of
Tripura,
Agartala
#&

++ '&( 0&+$
Government
of
Tripura,
Gurkhabasti,
Pandit
Nehru
Complex,
P.O.
Kunjaban,
Agartala,
West
Tripura
1#&,-&( '

&'2&'

 0&+$
Government
of
Tripura,
Churaibari
Check
Post,
P.O.
&
P.S.
Churaibari,
District
-
North
Tripura

3 #&,-&( '

&'2&'

 0&+$ Government
of
Tripura,
Charge0
VIII,
Agartala,
P.O.
Agartala,
P.S.
West
Agartala,
District
-
West
Tripura,

% &+-'2&'

+ 

  4
 5 
6 7 8

  46 5 
  
For
the
petitioner
















:

Mr.
A.K.
Bhowmik,
Sr.
Advocate



Mr.
R.
Dutta,
Advocate
For
the
respondents









:

Mr.
D.C.
Nath,
Advocate


Date
of
hearing
and
delivery
:

99
of
judgment
and
order

Whether
it
is
fit
for
reporting
:








:&+  √


  76; 7  
   

  This
petition
is
directed
against
the
order
dated
22.06.2015
delivered
in
Revision
case
No.47
of
2015
by
the
Commissioner
of
Taxes,
whereby
he
dismissed
the
revision
petition
of
the
petitioner
and
further
held
that
the
petitioner
transported
a
consignment
of
other
paper
products
taxable
under
entry
No.130
of
Schedule
II(b)
of
the
Tripura
Value
Added
Tax,
the
TVAT
Act
in
short.

<= It
is
not
disputed
that
the
petitioner
imported
certain
material
from
Kolkata
for
sale
in
the
State
of
Tripura.
According
to
the
petitioner,
the
material
was
to
be
used
as
covers
of
exercise
books.

According
to
the
Revenue
Department,
the
petitioner
imported
certain
material
showing
it
to
be
exercise
books
but
on
checking,
it
was
not
found
to
be
the
exercise
books.
The
officer
at
the
Churaibari
Checkpost
came
to
the
conclusion
that
the
material
was
paper
envelopes
in
61
packages
and
held
that
the
material
was
wrongly
declared
to
be
exercise
books
which
is
taxable
at
5%.
The
material
was
seized.
Against
this
order
of
seizure,
the
petitioner
approached
to
the
Commissioner
of
Taxes,
Government
of
Tripura,
who
passed
the
impugned
order
on
22.06.2015.

'&( +,!

&2 # #&" (& ', ?

,(&  @&0&(?

+& !A4 '2 #&

&  +& B&2 +  ( C

&( /(&0&(?

+&!A#&,( #&(+,!

&2 #

#&" (&'  C (& #& 0( & #&

& +& B&2 '2# 2,'

'

&'

' //"2&?/ (&2 #&

&  +&0&(?

+& !A #& ,( #&( +,!

&2 # #&" (& ?//&?

'. '2- "

'. 0&+DE'&0&(?

+&!A #& -&

'&( ( '+-( &2  ?'+ .'

&'

  @ #&( - -&( -(2,?

+4 0 !/& D3E ,'2&( &'

(" 1

.&3

  ?#&2,/&

! !,  2&?/ (&2 #& ?'+ .'

&'

 + @&0&(?

+& !A4 0 !/& DE #&(&(&$ #& +& B,(&

2& !" F$ #,( ! (  #&?A-+ + !+/, &/" G,+

 &2 '2#&'?&,-#&/2H <1= A
bare
perusal
of
this
portion
of
the
order
shows
that
the
petitioner
had
admitted
before
the
Commissioner
of
Taxes
that
the
item
seized
was
not
an
exercise
book
but
was
a
raw
material
for
use
in
preparing
the
exercise
book.
A
product
may
be
classified
as
a
certain
item
but
all
the
raw
materials
used
in
producing
that
product
do
not
necessary
fall
within
the
same
entry.
They
can
be
taxed
at
different
rates.
The
petitioner
mis0declared
that
the
item
was
an
exercise
book
because
even
according
to
her
it
is
not
an
exercise
book
but
it
is
a
cover
of
the
exercise
book.
Therefore,
we
are
not
in
agreement
with
the
petitioner
that
there
was
no
mis0declaration.

<3=
The
next
issue
raised
is
that,
according
to
the
petitioner,
even
if
the
material
is
not
an
exercise
book,
it
is
paper
within
the
meaning
of
entry
No.71
of
or
printed
material
within
the
meaning
of
entry
No.74
of
Schedule
II(a).
It
is
contended
that
the
residual
item
i.e.
entry
No.130
of
Schedule
II(b)
would
only
come
into
consideration
when
the
paper
product
does
not
fall
in
any
of
the
descriptions
under
entry
Nos.71
or
74.

<= We
are
at
this
stage
are
only
concerned
with
the
question
whether
the
order
of
seizure
is
valid
or
not.
This
Court
is
only
concerned
with
the
order
of
seizure
and
the
seizure
has
been
made
on
the
basis
of
mis0declaration.

.&13

 appears
to
be
incorrect.
Whether
the
item
falls
under
the
head
of
other
paper
products
under
entry
No.130
which
is
the
residual
entry
or
falls
under
entry
Nos.71
or
74,
is
something
which
the
assessing
officer
has
to
decide?
Therefore,

we
dispose
of
the
writ
petition
with
the
following
directions:

(i)
that
in
case
the
petitioner
wants
release
of
its
material,
he
shall
have
to
pay
the
tax
@14.5%.
(ii)
that
the
assessing
authority
shall
after
giving
opportunity
of
hearing
to
the
petitioner
decide
the
question
as
to
under
which
entry
of
the
TVAT
Act
the
product
which
is
brought
into
Tripura
from
Kolkata
by
the
petitioner
falls.

<I= We
however,
make
it
clear
that
this
product
cannot
be
termed
to
be
an
exercise
book
and
we
leave
it
to
the
assessing
authority
to
decide
after
hearing
the
party
whether
the
product
falls
under
entry
Nos.
71,
74
of
Schedule
II
(a)
or
entry
No.130
of
Schedule
II(b).
The
assessing
authority
shall
decide
this
question
uninfluenced
by
the
observation
of
the
Commissioner
of
Taxes
that
the
item
transported
is
other
paper
products
because
this
has
been
done
without
giving
any
reasons.


The
petition
is
disposed
of
in
the
aforesaid
terms.

No
costs.

.&33