9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 482X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods of the petitioner so seized vide Seizure Memo No. 12/2 and 12/3 dated April 4, 2009. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to present writ petition are as follows: The petitioner is a proprietorship concern registered under the provisions of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". It is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of lubricant oil. According to the petitioner on March 20, 2009 it had sold 29 drums of lubricant oil to one M/s. Hanuman Oil Company, 20/147, Jamuna Kinara, Agra. The value of the goods was approximately Rs. 2,43,056. On the same day it had sold some quantity of lubricant oil to another dealer, namely, M/s. Shree Ram Oil Trading Company, Daresi No. 3, Agra. The value of the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing authority imposed Rs. 1,74,000 and Rs. 1,89,994 respectively as penalty. The petitioner preferred appeals before the Additional Commissioner, Grade-II (Appeal), Commercial Tax, Noida. Along with the appeal the petitioner also filed application for grant of stay. The Additional Commissioner Grade-II (Appeals), Commercial Tax, Noida vide order dated March 5, 2010 granted 50 per cent stay. The matter was taken up further in appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated March 30, 2010 granted stay to the extent of 85 per cent of the disputed amount of penalty till the disposal of the appeal. The petitioner had deposited a total sum of Rs. 54,600 on April 29, 2010 vide Challan Nos. 15 and 16 which represented 15 per cent of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal, respondent No. 2 has rightly insisted upon the depositing of the amount in terms of the Court's earlier order or upon the finalization of penalty proceedings. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the various plea raised by the learned counsel for the parties. The demand of security for releasing the goods, which have been seized, is only for safeguarding the interest of the Revenue in respect of the amount which may be levied as tax on account of evasion and also the penalty which may be imposed. In the present case the penalty order has been passed. The Tribunal in the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the penalty order has granted partial stay of the order passed by the first appellant authority by directing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
