9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (12) TMI 369X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recovering the penalty imposed under section 14-B(7) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (for short, the Act ). 2.. The petitioner-company is registered as a dealer under the Act as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of leather goods and sports goods. The petitioner-company purchased raw hides as raw material for manufactur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... release of goods. Penalty of Rs. 2,55,000 was imposed under section 14-B(7) of the Act, vide order dated October 31, 1996. The petitioner-company furnished a bank guarantee for Rs. 2,55,000 on November 5, 1996. Goods were thereafter released on November 13, 1996. 3.. The petitioner-company has alleged that raw material could be purchased without payment of tax under the Exemption Certificate dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecovery by filing an appeal as provided in the Act. Since an alternative remedy is available against the levy and recovery of penalty, the course adopted by the petitioner by filing this writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution, cannot be allowed. 5.. The petitioner-company had earlier filed Civil Writ Petition No. 16771 of 1996 (Sarup Tanneries Ltd., Jalandhar v. State of Punjab) whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under the Act against the order passed by the Assessing Authority. 6.. Since this Court has already dismissed the earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner-company on the same cause of action, the present writ petition does not lie. The writ petitioner, through his counsel, has not chosen to make a reference to the earlier writ petition and that is not appropriate. It was the duty on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
