9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (4) TMI 311X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch were brought by a truck without any permit on July 23, 1986, through Duburdih Check-Post, Asansol. The penalty was imposed despite production on July 25, 1986, of a permit valid till September 5, 1986. Non-production of permit at the time of entry through the check-post is sought to be explained by the applicant by saying that for the first time the goods were sent by its New Delhi office under instruction from the head office at Bombay, and that the carriers from New Delhi were ignorant of the procedure to be followed for entry into West Bengal. In support of this, it is stated that an intimation of despatch of the goods sent on July 18, 1986, by post was received in the Calcutta office only on July 30, 1986. Meanwhile, the goods were s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re brought into the check-post without a permit, there was violation of law, and, therefore, penalty was rightly imposed. It is their further case that the quantum of penalty as decided by the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, being simply a question of fact, cannot be gone into by this Tribunal, which is of co-ordinate status of the High Court. 5.. Let it be stated that the applicant paid the penalty of Rs. 93,000 as soon as it was demanded. They approached the appellate forum at first, which reduced the amount of penalty to Rs. 70,000. Then the applicant moved the Commercial Taxes Tribunal which further reduced the penalty to Rs. 50,000. 6.. Having regard to the facts that all the three authorities below, namely, the Commercial Tax Officer, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal to Rs. 20,000. In these circumstances, a single Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that it was not open to sit in appeal on the quantum of penalty. We do not feel that these two decisions have any bearing on the instant case. We do not agree that this Tribunal is powerless to consider the amount of penalty. We are of the view that the provisions of section 8 of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal Act, 1987 and particularly sub-section (6) thereof have given us adequate powers and jurisdiction to enter into the question of quantum of penalty, specially when it is patently unfair. 8.. We, however, like to make it clear that we are generally not inclined to enter into the question of quantum of penalty, since penalty is to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
