2011 (1) TMI 1254

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in S.T.A. No. 1383/2004 dated November 11, 2008 whereunder a penalty order passed by the check-post officer was quashed. The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in detail has set out the facts of the case and in law governing the case on hand and by a considered order, has set aside the penalty imposed by the check-post officer. What could be gathered therefrom is, the go .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ced the penalty to 50 per cent. It is against that order, the assessee preferred a second appeal in the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, in the light of the aforesaid undisputed facts came to the conclusion that, there was no liability to pay tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. There is no question of evasion of any tax payable to the State of Karnataka. Therefor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... equent seller, namely, Sheh Motilal Suresh Kumar. That aspect of the matter has absolutely no relevance to the levy of the impugned penalty. Therefore, relying on the said judgment of this court, it set aside the penalty imposed. In the facts of the case, we do not see any justification to interfere with the well considered order as it is not a case of attempt of evasion of tax or non-payment of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X