2020 (3) TMI 13 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Imposition of penalty on petitioner firm - transporting the goods without valid road permit - HELD THAT - The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the road permit in the present case had expired due to the unforeseen fire occurrence, that had taken place in the business premises of the selling dealer, is of no help to the petitioner. The impugned Judgement clearly shows that this aspect of the matter had also been considered by the Tribunal, which shows that fire had occurred in the premises of the selling dealer at Shivkashi on 05.09.2012, and after about three months thereafter there was transaction between the petitioner firm and the selling dealer on 03.12.2012, pursuant whereto, the crackers were being transported. As such this case is also squarely a case, in which the crackers were being transported without any valid road permit. Application dismissed - decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of penalty imposed for transporting goods without a valid road permit.

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Jharkhand involved a case where the petitioner, a fireworks business firm, was penalized for transporting goods without a valid road permit. The petitioner challenged the penalty imposed by the Assessing Authority, which was upheld by the Appellate Authority and the Tribunal. The road permit produced by the truck driver had expired before the transportation of goods took place. The penalty imposed was three times the tax on the value of goods, amounting to ?8,98,258.20. The petitioner argued that the expiration of the road permit was due to unforeseen circumstances, specifically a fire incident at the selling dealer's premises, and there was no intention to evade tax as all goods were properly accounted for.

The petitioner contended that the penalty orders were unjustified, emphasizing the unforeseen circumstances leading to the expired road permit. However, the State argued that the case was similar to a previous decision by the Court where goods were transported without a valid road permit, justifying the penalty. The State maintained that since the road permit had expired, it constituted a case of no road permit. The Court examined the records and found that the expiration of the road permit due to the fire incident at the selling dealer's premises did not absolve the petitioner from transporting goods without a valid road permit.

Ultimately, the Court upheld the Tribunal's judgment, stating that the petitioner's argument regarding the expired road permit was insufficient to challenge the penalty orders. The Court found no illegality in the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the writ application, concluding that there was no merit in the petitioner's case.