9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (9) TMI 917X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed by the learned Tax Board on the ground that at the time of checking of the goods found in movement in truck No. GJ-7U-8228, the bill and bilty were not found along with the goods in transit and the defence taken by the respondentassessee was that the bilty was not prepared to save the commission of ₹ 100 to be paid for preparing the bilty. However, the bill in respect of goods found at the time of checking was produced by the assessee. 3. This court in ACTO v. L.G. Electronics (SBSTR No. 198 of 2010) decided on April 1, 2011 after taking into account all the recent Supreme Court decisions in the case of State of Rajasthan v. D.P. Metals [2001] 124 STC 611 (SC); [2002] 1 SCC 279, Assistant Commercial Taxes Officer v. Bajaj Elect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before this court as in the present cases one liners as the reasons are given in the impugned penalty orders that reply filed by the assessee(s) is not satisfactory. How and why the same is not found satisfactory is not explained. It is also not clear as to whether any specific opportunity was given to the assessee(s) at all to complete the incomplete declaration forms or produce the duly filled up declaration form in ST-18A for such compliance with the principles of natural justice. 13. While the appellate authorities allowed the appeals of the assessee(s) on the ground of absence of mens rea or the amendment with effect from March 22, 2002 in section 78(5) of the Act and holding that such penalty could not be imposed on the owner of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the principles of natural justice." 4. Accordingly, for statistical purposes, this revision petition is disposed of and order passed by the learned Tax Board on September 10, 2002 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Deputy Commissioner (Administration), who will assign the matter to appropriate assessing authority in terms of this order, who in turn will proceed to decide the case afresh in the light of judgment of this court in the case of L.G. Electronics (SBSTR No. 198 of 2010) decided on April 1, 2011. Since, considerable time has already passed, therefore, it is expected that the assessing authority will pass such fresh orders after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee as aforesaid, within a pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
