JUDGMENT The goods of the petitioner was seized under Section 48 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act on the ground, that the driver of the vehicle failed to produce Form DS-2 and that the goods were dispatched from 1.12.2015, which reached the border on 3.12.2015 after a considerable lapse of time and, therefore, the movement of the goods on the same invoice appeared to be suspicious. 2. Sri V.K. Upadhya, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner laid stress on the circular issued by the Department dated 8.1.2008, which indicates that the goods should not be seized even if one of the document appears to be a genuine document. It was contended that Form DS2 was not required to be submitted by the petitioner, but was required to be submitted to the Delhi authority by the receiver of the goods at Delhi and, therefore, the said document was not an essential requirement to be considered for seizing the goods at the border. It was also urged by the learned senior counsel that there was no undue delay in the movement of the goods after the goods were taken out from the factory premises. 3. Be that as it may. We find that the goods has been seized on the basis of certain lacuna’s indicated in the show cause notice. 4. We, accordingly, dispose of the matter directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. One lac on the basis of which the goods would be released within 24 hours of such deposit. The amount so deposited would be subject to penalty proceedings, which would be decided appropriately within a reasonable period.