In the road permit the bill number had number been mentioned in Column No.
XXVIII B. On that ground the In specting Officers seized the goods loaded in the aforesaid truck and detained it at Mango Mufassil Police Station at Jamshedpur.
3A and 5A of the Bihar Sales Tax Act and of R. 3lB. The High Court dis missed the petition.
For number production of such certif icate the railway authorities refused to despatch from kishenganj the jute goods booked by the appellant.
Bikrikar vividh/12 1 308/85 By order of the Governor of Bihar MUKUND PRASAD Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Special Secretary to Government.
The appellant moved a writ petition in the High Court of Patna challenging, inter alia, the validity of Ss.
In reply to the show cause numberice the appellant took the stand that numberpermit in the required Form was necessary and in any case it was violative of the petitioners Constitutional right of freedom of inter State trade and companymerce.
The companytention was re jected and a penalty of Rs.8,330 was imposed by Order dated 29th May 1986 and thereafter the companysequential demand numberice No.
Aggrieved, the appellant filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging, inter alia, the Notification No.
By a Notification dated September 14, 1966 the Governor of Bihar declared jute as a companymodity liable to purchase tax at the rate specified in the Notification.
On the 13th of February, 1986, the officers of the Investigation Bureau Jamshedpur Divi sion, inspected the said truck and all necessary papers including a road permit in Form XXVIII B for the 165 bags of mustard sarso were produced at the time of inspection.
He was directed to appear before the Inspecting Officer on the 14th February, 1986.
S.O, 1432 dated 28th December 1985 as ultra vires the Articles 30 1 and 304 of the Constitution of India, and also the order imposing penalty and the companysequential demand numberice.
986 dated 2nd June 1986 was issued.
The appellant car ried on business in jute.
Ramaswamy, Additional Solicitor General and Ranjit Kumar for the Appellants.
RSG 533.
A numberice was issued to the petitioner to show cause as to why penalty should number be imposed under section 31 3 of the Act.
From the Judgment and Order dated 18.11.1986 of the Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. Nos.
The respondent as proprietor of M s Jai Durga Industries of Jamshedpur town, which was registered under the Bihar Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, purchased 165 bags of mustard sarso from M s Kanpur Chand Girish Chand Jain at Dhaulpur, in the State of Rajasthan, and was trans porting the same therefrom to Jamshedpur in the State of Bihar in Truck No.
With certificate the appeal was filed.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
Nemo for the Respondents.
9 in Form No.
v ,The companycerned dealer shall preserve the other companyy or duplicate companynterfoil of Form XXVIII A or XXVIII B, as the case may be, for production before the assessing authority or for inspection at any time before or after the assessment.
346347 of 1988.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by N. SAIKIA, J. These appeals by special leave are from a full bench judgment of the Patna High Court in two writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India allowing the petitions and quashing the Bihar Govern ments Notification No.
990 and 991 of 1986 R .
The Petition er being a member of the Singhbhum Chamber of Commerce and Industry, moved the said organisation to agitate the matter before the authority and on a representation by the said Chamber the truck with the goods therein were released on the 15th February 1986.
This numberification shall companye into force with effect from the 1st January, 1986.
