9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1033X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consignor at Chennai. Movement of goods was from one direction whereas transaction of sale was effected from a different destination. Consequently, it was considered that the movement of goods was one without document and hence it was "no document case". The assessing authority imposed double the rate of tax as penalty. In the suo motu revision, the penalty was reduced from double the rate of tax to the rate of tax leviable. On this ground also we do not find any reason to interfere with the reasoned order of the revisional authority. The tax levied is due to the violation of law and hence, the revisional authority has rightly passed the impugned order. The penalty imposed has been reduced in revision. A minimal penalty has been imposed. D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uble penalty as imposed by the assessing authority was reduced to the amount of tax leviable. Accordingly, the order under appeal was set aside and the penalty was modified. Hence the present appeal by the assessee. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside. He contends that there was no intention to avoid the tax due to the State. Hence, imposition of penalty is bad in law. He contends that it is for the State to show the loss of revenue to the State. Hence, revisional power could not be exercised. In support of his contention, he relies on the judgment in the case of Khemka Plyland, Bangalore v. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Zone-II, Banga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the consignor at Chennai. Movement of goods was from one direction whereas transaction of sale was effected from a different destination. Consequently, it was considered that the movement of goods was one without document and hence it was no document case . The assessing authority imposed double the rate of tax as penalty. In the suo motu revision, the penalty was reduced from double the rate of tax to the rate of tax leviable. On this ground also we do not find any reason to interfere with the reasoned order of the revisional authority. The tax levied is due to the violation of law and hence, the revisional authority has rightly passed the impugned order. The penalty imposed has been reduced in revision. A minimal penalty has been impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
