ARUN TANDON, J. ( 1 ) REVISIONIST is a transporter. It is alleged that certain goods belonging to Royal Government of bhutan were being transported by the revisionist vide Truck No. HR-38k 2982. The consignment copy of the transporter, commercial invoice and an export declaration form accompanied the said consignment amongst other documents. The aforesaid vehicle entered into the State of U. P. at Entry Check-Post Samkudiraj, district Padrauna on 1. 2. 2006. At the Entry check-Post transit pass in triplicate, as required under Section 28-A of the U. P. Trade Tax Act was prepared by the Entry Check-Post Authority. The description of the goods was mentioned as copper wire. The aforesaid consignment reached the exit check-post within the State of U. P. at transport Nagar, Ghaziabad. At the exit check-post, the Assistant Commissioner, Help Centre incharge, Transport Nagar, Ghaziabad after going through the records accompanying the consignment and on verification of the goods, on the vehicle in question, came to a reasonable satisfaction that goods were not as per the description as disclosed in transit pass and other documents. Therefore, the Assistant Commissioner in exercise of powers under Section 13a (1a)of the Trade Tax Act passed an order of seizure dated 5. 2. 2006. Thereafter notices were issued to revisionist and ultimately an order under Section 13-A (6), requiring the transporter to deposit a sum of Rs. 26 lacs and odds for the purposes of release of goods, was passed. ( 2 ) FEELING aggrieved by the order so passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Trade Tax, Mohan nagar, Ghaziabad. The transporter filed an appeal under Section 10 of the Trade Tax Act before the Trade Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad. The appeal has been numbered as Appeal No. 79 of 2006. By means of the order impugned in the present revision, the Tribunal has partly allowed the appeal and has directed that on deposit of a sum of Rs. 6 lacs, which according to the revisionist represents 10% of the value of the goods covered by the consignment, the same be released. It is against this order of the Trade Tax Tribunal, the present revision has been filed under Section 11 of the Trade Tax Act. 6 lacs, which according to the revisionist represents 10% of the value of the goods covered by the consignment, the same be released. It is against this order of the Trade Tax Tribunal, the present revision has been filed under Section 11 of the Trade Tax Act. ( 3 ) COUNSEL for the revisionist submits that there may be same discrepancies in the description of the goods as mentioned in the transit pass issued in the entry check-post viz-a-viz the description mentioned in the other documents accompanying with the consignment. It is submitted that an order of seizure under Section 13-A (1a) cannot be issued on mere presumption. In support of the contention so raised, counsel for the revisionist has placed reliance upon the judgment of this court reported in 2005 NTN (Vol 28) 198; M/s Murliwala Agrotech Limited v. Commissioner of trade Tax U. P. , Lucknow and 2005 UPTC 445; Rohit Road Lines v. Commissioner, Trade Tax. ( 4 ) COUNSEL for the revisionist further contended that there is hardly any difference in the description of the goods as mentioned in the invoice and the transit pass and goods actually found by the authority. It is therefore contended that the seizure itself being apparently illegal, the demand of security for release of the goods is automatically rendered illegal. ( 5 ) I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the Trade Tax revision. ( 6 ) THE power to seize goods during transit has been conferred upon the authorities under the trade Tax Act vide Section 13-A (1-A ). For ready reference Section 13-A (1-A) is being quoted herein below: 13-A (1-A)-Where any officer empowered by the State Government in this behalf has reason to believe that the goods found in any vehicle, building or place arc not traced to any dealer in his accounts, register or other documents, maintained in the course of his business, he shall have power to seize such goods and the remaining provisions of this section shall mutatis mutandis apply in relation to such seizure. ( 7 ) FROM a bare reading of Section 13-A (1-A) it is apparently clear that seizure of goods can be directed if the authority concerned has reason to believe that goods found in a vehicle are not traced to the documents maintained in the course of business. ( 7 ) FROM a bare reading of Section 13-A (1-A) it is apparently clear that seizure of goods can be directed if the authority concerned has reason to believe that goods found in a vehicle are not traced to the documents maintained in the course of business. The power to seize goods with reference to the description mentioned in transit pass issued under Section 29-A viz-a-viz the goods actually found at the point of exit check-post is conceded by the revisionist and therefore the competence for seizure of the goods in exercise of powers under Section 13-A (1-A) is not in dispute. Counsel for the revisionist however contends that in the facts of the case there was no justifiable reason to believe, on the basis whereby authority concerned could have directed the seizure of the goods. The issue therefore up for consideration in the present Trade Tax Revision is as to whether the description of the goods as disclosed in the document accompanying the consignment including the commercial invoice, consignment copy, export declaration form, and the description of the goods as mentioned in the transit pass issued at entry check post is identical to that of the goods which were found by the authority concerned at the exit check-post or not. ( 8 ) FROM the export declaration form issued by the department of Revenue and Custom, Royal government of Bhutan (enclosed at page 19 of the present Trade Tax Revision), it is apparent that the description of the commodity has been recorded as "stranded wire, cables, plated bands. The goods found at the exit check-post by the authority concerned was copper drawn in the shape of wire. At this stage reference may be had to following entries in the schedule notified under the Trade Tax Act: 25. The goods found at the exit check-post by the authority concerned was copper drawn in the shape of wire. At this stage reference may be had to following entries in the schedule notified under the Trade Tax Act: 25. (i) All electrical goods, instruments, apparatus, appliances and all such articles the use of which cannot be had except with the application of electrical energy, including fans AIR circulators fluorescent tubes (including their starters, chokes, fixtures, fittings and accessories), electrical earthenware and porcelain, electrical equipments, plant and their accessories required for generation, distribution and transmission of electrical energy (including transformers and electrical cables) electric motors and parts thereof, and all other accessories and components whether sold as a whole or in parts, but excluding torches, torch cells, dry cell batteries, torch bulbs and filament lighting bulbs and also excluding goods mentioned in Clause (ii) below. . . (ii) -Washing machines, vacuum cleaners, voltage stablisers, transmission wires and towers, and a. C. S. R. Conductors including components, parts and accessories thereof. 38. All other ores, metals, scraps and alloys including sheets and circles used in the manufacture of brass wares and copper wares except those included in any other entry or any other notification issued under the U. P. Trade Tax Act. 348. Copper (or its alloy with brass or German Silver) wire and wiremesh excluding wire required for distribution and transmission of electrical energy. ( 9 ) FROM the aforesaid schedule of rates notified under the U. P. Trade Tax Act, 1948, it is apparently clear that copper, copper wire, cable, cable wire used for electrical purposes and copper in shape of wire to be used for other purposes has been classified separately. ( 10 ) IN view of the aforesaid, this Court is satisfied that the description of the goods as disclosed in the export declaration form accompanying the consignment which reads as stranded wire, cables, plated bands, and the actual goods found on the vehicle at the exit check-post is copper wire, there was material before the officer concerned for reason to believe that the goods found in the vehicle were not identical, as such the exercise of power of seizure under Section 13-A (1-A) by the officer cannot be said to be arbitrary. Accordingly, the first contention raised on behalf of the revisionist is repelled, ( 11 ) THIS leads to an issue as to whether the demand of 10% of the value of the goods, for release of the same under Section 13-A (6) of the Act, can be said to be arbitrary so as to call for interference in exercise of power under Section 11 of the Trade Tax Act. ( 12 ) COUNSEL for the revisionist has not been able to establish that the demand of 10% of the total value of the goods covered by the consignment, as demanded by the Tribunal, exceeds the amount as would be sufficient to cover the tax and the penalty which may be imposed on the conclusion of the proceedings initiated under Section 13-A (1-A) with reference to Section 15-A (q) of the U. P. Trade Tax Act. ( 13 ) IN such circumstances the demand of 10% of the total value of the goods cannot be said to be contrary to the provisions of Section 13-A (6) and therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the said finding also. ( 14 ) ANY observations made in this order are only for the purposes of arriving at a conclusion as to whether in the facts of the present case power of seizure exercised by the authority empowered are prima facie based on reasonsto believe or not. ( 15 ) THE case law relied upon by the counsel does not assist the revisionist in the facts of the present case. Revision is accordingly dismissed. . .