2015 (3) TMI 134

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e said as lacking. Consequently, the deletion of interest and penalty on the part of Tribunal could not be said as unjustifiable. In the event, when the issue is already covered by the above referred decision, we do not find that any substantial question of law would arise as sought to be canvassed. Following decision of STATE OF GUJARAT Versus JAY STEEL AND TUBES TRADERS [2015 (2) TMI 372 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - Decided against Revenue.
Jayant Patel And S. H. Vora,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr Chintan Dave, AGP For the Respondent : Mr Sudhir Mehta, Adv. ORDER (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Jayant Patel) 1. The present appeal is directed against the order dated 19.3.2014 passed by the Tribunal, whereby the demand of tax is confirmed, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 11.2014 had observed thus:- "1. State is in appeal against the judgment of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal ('the Tribunal' for short) proposing following questions for our consideration: "(1) Whether Tribunal erred in deleting levy of interest and penalty merely because assessee had excess input credit adjustable against tax demand? (2) Any other substantial question of law as may be deemed fit by the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be framed." 2. From the record, it emerges that the Revenue contests the deletion of interest and penalty by the Tribunal in case of the respondent - assessee. The Tribunal in the impugned judgment also held as under: "The appellant has paid the amount of tax fully therefore, we a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he assessed additional tax, there was no intention on part of the assessee to avoid payment of taxes, no question of law arises. Tax appeal is dismissed. Civil Application also dismissed." 7. Same situation arises in the present matter inasmuch as the demand is confirmed and the adjustment is permitted but the interest and penalty imposed are deleted. 8. It is not in dispute that the Assessee had no surplus balance of input credit, which has been adjusted against the demand of tax upon reassessment. Under these circumstances, the element of avoidance of tax could be said as lacking. Consequently, the deletion of interest and penalty on the part of Tribunal could not be said as unjustifiable. In the event, when the issue is already co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X