9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 864X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n such circumstances, it was appropriate for the Tribunal to have remanded the matter to the assessing authority and has erred in not remitting the same to the assessing authority.The substantial questions are answered accordingly and it is held that the Tribunal ought to have remitted the matter to the appropriate authority for fresh decision in accordance with law. Matter is remanded to the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner-cum-Joint Director (Investigation), Patiala Division, Patiala. - VATAP No. 72 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 5-7-2012 - AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND SANDHAWALIA G.S., JJ. For the Appellant: N.L. Sammi For the Respondents : Gagandeep Singh Wasu, Senior Deputy Advocate-General, Haryana, The judgment of the cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was passed under the said provision? (iii) Whether notice issued to the transport company should have been treated as a valid service upon the consignee in view of Explanation II of section 14B(11) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948? (iv) Whether the appellant has any locus standi to file this appeal when penalty was imposed upon the transport company who had failed to prove the genuineness of the documents and assigned any reason for not reporting the transaction at any ICC of Punjab State as required under section 14B(4) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948? (v) Whether the order of Tribunal is sustainable in law under the facts and circumstances of the case? 2. The primary issue that arises for consideration in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Manager of the transport company was recorded and the goods were released against cash security. Thereafter, the case was sent to the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Mobile Wing, Punjab, Chandigarh, for taking action under section 14B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (in short, the 1948 Act ) who issued a notice for affording an opportunity to prove the genuineness of the documents by appearing on May 11, 2001. The manager of the transport company appeared and failed to produce any account books or any other evidence to prove the genuineness of the transaction. The assessing authority vide order dated May 11, 2001 (annexure A2) imposed a penalty of ₹ 1,38,732 under section 14B(7)(iii) of the 1948 Act holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es Pvt. Ltd. [2010] 29 VST 526 (P H); [2010] 35 PHT 566 (P H). It has come on record that Shri Gian Chand Manager of M/s. Chaudhary Road Carrier had sought release of the goods by furnishing cash security. The penalty imposed by the Department had been paid by the consignee and thereafter the appeal had also been filed by the respondent-consignee. Once that was so, we are of the opinion that the issuance of notice to the respondent was mandatory. The failure to issue notice rendered the order imposing penalty unsustainable. In such circumstances, it was appropriate for the Tribunal to have remanded the matter to the assessing authority and has erred in not remitting the same to the assessing authority. However, learned counsel for the respo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
