9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst the order of the Trade Tax Tribunal dated May 28, 2011 passed in Second Appeal No. 331 of 2011. The second appeal was directed against an order of the first appellate authority, namely, Additional Commissioner II (Appeal), Commercial Tax, Mirzapur dated April 23, 2011 whereunder penalty of ₹ 6,56,306 was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. Facts in short giving rise to the presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zure was held to be justified however, demand of security for release of the goods was reduced to the amount of tax payable on the goods. The revisionist filed Trade Tax Revision No. 793 of 2010 (Rajshree Jewellers (N. Agrawal) v. Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Lucknow) wherein an order was passed permitting the revisionist to deposit 50 per cent of the amount demanded in cash and the balance 50 pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Act before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, in its order dated May 28, 2011, has recorded the following findings: (a) the goods which were seized were not as per the document produced at the time of seizure. (b) the chalan was bearing July 30, 2010 as the date when the goods themselves were intercepted at 6 a.m. on the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The counsel for the assessee made an attempt to challenge the findings recorded by the Tribunal in the order dated May 28, 2011 by contending that the transaction was duly recorded in the account books and that there is no justification for reducing the penalty by ₹ 50,000 only. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present writ petition. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
