9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1025X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of law raised in this appeal are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal being devoid of the merits, is dismissed. - STA No. 96 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 11-8-2011 - SABHAHIT V.G. AND RAVI MALIMATH JJ. A. Satyanarayan for the petitioner Shivayogiswamy, Additional Government Advocate, for the respondent JUDGMENT This appeal is by the assessee being aggrieved by the order of the revisional authority restoring the penalty imposed on the assessee. The assessee is a dealer in travelling bags and suit cases. The goods vehicle carrying the commodities was intercepted on June 25, 2007, when the goods were being unloaded at the assessee's place. The person in- charge of the go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first appellate authority has allowed the appeal with due and proper application of mind on the clear position of law. He is for the Government revenue who holding that there was no attempt to evade following the law laid down by the Division Bench of this honourable High Court in the case of Khemka Plywood, Bangalore v. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, South Zone 2, Bangalore. The order of the first appellate authority passed in No. VAT.AP. No. 407/07-08 dated November 26, 2008 is marked as annexure B. Whether or not the revisional authority is justified in initiating the revision proceedings under section 64(1) of the KVATAct, 2003 in respect of the impugned levy of penalty. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hence, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of penalty. The citation relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has no application to the facts on hand. In the said case, the documents were produced before the check-post authorities. However, the check-post authorities did not consider the same. It was a case of non-scrutiny of the documents produced. In the instant case, the facts and circumstances are otherwise. It is not the case of the appellant that he has tendered the documents and the authorities did not verify the same. On the other hand, he contends that it was the duty of the check-post authorities to collect the said documents. We are unable to accept the contention and the reasons advance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
