9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 912X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 13A(4) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. The applicant is a transporter and engaged in the business of transporting the goods on hire basis from one place to another. Three packets of ready-made hosiery were booked with the applicant-company for the purposes of transportation from one place to another. The entry pass was obtained while entering in the State of U.P. Act the exit check-post, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ade by the dealer. Apart from the above, the names of the consignor and consignee were also shown and as such he was of the opinion that there was no justification to levy the penalty. The said order has been set aside by the Tribunal in the appeal filed by the Department. However, the quantum of penalty was fixed at Rs. 17,000. In memo of revision, the following questions of law have been f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... axable with effect from November 1, 1981 at four per cent. The Tribunal concluded that in view of the notification dated September 12, 1986 the ready garments are unclassified goods and were liable to be taxed at Rs. 8 per cent. A bare perusal of the order of the Tribunal would show that the Tribunal has failed to address itself to the various aspects of the penalty order which were pointed out by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case which were taken into consideration by the first appellate authority, before reversing the order Viewed as above, I find sufficient force in the revision. No case for levying the penalty has been made out. It is strange to note that Rs. 15,928 (wrongly mentioned as Rs. 10,068 in the question) was levied by the assessing authority, but the Tribunal has fixed at Rs. 17,000 which is arb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
