2006 (12) TMI 477

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessment year, 1989-90 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as, the Central Act ). By the impugned order, the Tribunal has deleted the penalty under section 10A of the Central Act, which was levied by the assessing authority for the violation of section 10(b) of the Central Act. The assessing authority levied the penalty under section 10A of the Central Act on the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Counsel submitted that the order of the Tribunal is patently erroneous. He submitted that admittedly the dealer was not registered for the impugned items, which were imported from outside the State of U.P. and in respect of which form C were issued. He further submitted that merely because the details of the form C were furnished informing the import of the alleged goods, it cannot be said that th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... egistered for the aforesaid items under the Central Act. In this view of the matter, it is a case where while issuing form C, dealer had falsely represented that it was registered and issued form C. Dealer is, accordingly, liable for penalty under section 10A of the Central Act. Since the Tribunal has not considered about the quantum of penalty, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal to adjud .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X