9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 374X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ffer of money, he would have not allowed the vehicle to cross ICC and if had accepted it, he would have let off the vehicle. Thus, there does not seem to be any substance in the story proffered by the Department - in favour of assessee. - VAT Appeal No.107 of 2012 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 10-9-2012 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA JJ. Present:- Mr. Piyush Kant Jain, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the appellants. ---- Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. 1. The State of Punjab has preferred this appeal under Section 68(2) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short, the Act ) against the impugned order dated 17.3.2011, Annexure A.3 passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab (for brevity, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,884/- against the respondent under Section 51(7) (c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order, the respondent filed an appeal before the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner-cum-Joint Director (Investigation) Patiala Division, Patiala which was dismissed vide order dated 25.2.2010, Annexure A.2. The respondent filed second appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 17.3.2011, Annexure A.3, the appeal was accepted. Hence this appeal by the State of Punjab before this Court. 3. The solitary question for determination is whether there was any attempt to evade tax within the ambit of Section 51(7) ( c) of the Act by the respondent-dealer. The Tribunal while reversing the findings of the authorities below came to the conclusion that there was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ily been made to the said constable, his name would have certainly been disclosed by the driver in his statement. There are two things; if he had spurned the offer of money, he would have not allowed the vehicle to cross ICC and if had accepted it, he would have let off the vehicle. Thus, there does not seem to be any substance in the story proffered by the Department. An attempt to evade tax has not been established. 4. The Tribunal had come to the conclusion that there was no difference in the rates depicted in the delivery slip and the invoice after adding the Central Excise at the rate of 16.32% in the bill. The rates in both the documents were identical. The version of the department that driver of the vehicle had tried to gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
