CWP No. 12468 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 10410 of 2011 and CWP No. 12468 of 2011 Date of Decision: 4.8.2011 M/s Yanshika Impex ....Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. C.M. No. 10410 of 2011 Civil misc. application is allowed and the reply by way of affidavit on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 is taken on record. CWP No. 12468 of 2011 In this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release its vehicles and goods which have been detained illegally. The facts, in brief, as narrated in the petition are that the petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Punjab CWP No. 12468 of 2011 -2- Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short “the Act”) and is engaged in the business of trading of iron and steel goods. It is also registered with the Sales Tax Department having TIN No. 03812066920. The petitioner purchased certain goods from M/s Aey Ess Steel Industries through their VAT invoices dated 9.7.2011. The said goods were further sold in the course of inter-state trade and commerce to M/s Shivalik Steels, Jaipur and M/s Tushar Pipe Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur for which necessary bills were issued along with goods receipts. While the goods were on its way from Mandi Gobindgarh to Jaipur and were yet to report at ICC Chullar Kalan in District Sangrur, the same were detained by some police officials who asked the drivers to produce the documents. On production of the said documents, the said police officials told that they want to detain the vehicles as, according to them, the information had not been generated at the ICC. The drivers of the trucks were beaten mercilessly and were made to sign on some blank papers which might have been handed over to the Excise and Taxation Department. The cash with the drivers was also taken by the police personnel. The said vehicles were taken to Police Station Bareta. On 11.7.2011 at about 1.00 PM, Shri S.S. Manshahia, ETO, Patiala reached at the spot and asked the personnel to take the goods and the vehicles into custody and after completing certain formalities, the vehicles and the goods were handed over to respondent No.4. On 12.7.2011, when Shri Kamal Kumar reached the office of AETC along with his account books, he was asked to deposit the penalty @ 54% of the value of goods. When the ETO failed to issue detention notices, the petitioner through its Accountant sent telegrams to the AETC, Patiala as well as the ETO, CWP No. 12468 of 2011 -3- Patiala on 13.7.2011. Thereafter, the petitioner approached respondent No.4, who informed the petitioner that FIR No.17 dated 11.7.2011 had been registered and vehicles bearing registration Nos. PB-23H-6978 and PB-23H-8371 had been handed over to the police station. Once again, the petitioner approached the ETO and AETC, Patiala to issue detention notices and also to release the vehicles and the goods as no case was made out against the petitioner but they refused to do anything in that regard and insisted for depositing penalty to the tune of 54% of the value of goods. Hence, the present writ petition. Upon notice of motion having been issued, the State has filed reply by way of affidavit wherein it has been stated that two separate orders of detention have been passed under Section 51(6)(b) of the Act on 10.7.2011 in respect of two vehicles bearing registration Nos. PB-23H-6978 and PB-23G-8371 which, were carrying the goods comprising of iron pipes. It has further been stated that penalty proceedings were initiated and vide order dated 21.7.2011, penalties of Rs.5,01,146/- and Rs.5,77,428/- were imposed under Section 51(7)(c) of the Act. Learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the orders have been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the trucks have been withheld and liability of Rs.10,78,574/- has been created arbitrarily. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we direct that since the petitioner is a registered dealer with the Department, the trucks shall be released to the petitioners on its furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.10,78,574/- i.e. equal to the amount of penalty CWP No. 12468 of 2011 -4- imposed by the respondents. Further, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the respondents are also directed to pass fresh orders after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 4, 2011 (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) gbs ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE