9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (10) TMI 567X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods would be sent to Patna from Kanpur railway station is an afterthought. Nowhere this fact has been pleaded before the authorities below even in the grounds of appeals and in the circumstances this fact cannot be noticed for the first time in this court. The Tribunal has rightly upheld the penalty and no interference is called for by this court. Revision dismissed. - - - - - Dated:- 1-10-2007 - RAJES KUMAR , J. RAJES KUMAR J. These are three revisions arising from the order of the Tribunal dated August 26, 2002 all for the assessment year 1993-94. In all three revisions, since the common facts are involved, the same are being disposed of by a common order. The Tribunal has also disposed of three separate appeals of the thr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the appeals in part. The Tribunal held that there was violation of provisions of section 28B of the Act but reduced the quantum of penalty. Heard Sri Alok Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the goods, in respect of which the transit passes were obtained from the Shree Nagar check-post, Hamirpur, were unloaded at Kanpur Central Railway Station and thereafter dispatched through railway to Patna State of Bihar where impugned goods were delivered to the respective parties. He submitted that when the goods were booked at the Kanpur Railway Station, necessary endorsement had been taken from the booking clerk of the railway in the tran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rk of railway has no authority under the law to make an endorsement in the transit passes and therefore such endorsement has no evidentiary value. He further submitted that it was claimed that the goods were dispatched by a party of Chhatarpur (M.P.) and on inquiry, it was found that the said party had not disclosed such sales in its assessment as inter-State sales and could not produce the books of account for necessary verification. In this view of the matter, the dealer failed to prove that the goods had actually gone outside the State of U.P. He submitted that the method adopted by the applicant was an organised and planned way to evade the tax and even the Tribunal has taken a lenient view in reducing the quantum of penalty. He submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it passes were obtained have gone outside the State of U.P. The admitted fact is that the transit passes obtained at the entry check-post have not been surrendered at the exit check-post. In view of the above, it is a clear case where an organised and planned method had been adopted by the applicant to evade the tax. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant that in form XXXIV there was a mention that the goods would be sent to Patna from Kanpur railway station is an afterthought. Nowhere this fact has been pleaded before the authorities below even in the grounds of appeals and in the circumstances this fact cannot be noticed for the first time in this court. The Tribunal has rightly upheld the penalty and no interference is calle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
