9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 2002 filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ of mandamus to quash the order dated 19.5.2001, Annexure P.13 passed by the respondent Excise and Taxation Officer and for cancellation of penalty upheld by the Sales Tax Tribunal, vide order dated 14.1.2002, Annexure P.18. 3. A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved, as narrated in CWP No.8689 of 2002 may be noticed. The petitioner is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 (in short, "the HGST Act") as well as Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (in short, "the CST Act"). It is engaged in the business of manufacturing of laminated sheets. It is maintaining regular books of account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k and the goods were not covered with genuine and proper documents as required under Section 37(2) of the Act. After the goods were detained vide notice, dated 17.5.2001, Annexure P.7, the petitioner company's representative appeared before the authority and produced copies of documents showing the import of the material regarding plant and machinery, purchase order and commercial invoice. After examining the matter, the Excise and Taxation Officer (ETO) imposed penalty of Rs. 3,60,000/= vide order dated 19.5.2001, Annexure P.13. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner filed appeal before the Joint Excise and Taxation Commissioner (A). Vide order dated 27.8.2001, Annexure P.17, the appeal was dismissed and the order of the ETO was upheld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts (India)'s case (supra) while dealing with identical issue had recorded as under:- "7. From the perusal of the above, it would be clear that the Sales Tax Tribunal has found it as a fact that the purchases and sales made by the petitioner were not leviable to tax under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 and that at the time when the goods were detained, the petitioner had requested the officer detaining the goods to verify the documents with the material in all respects before the release of the goods and that the presumption could be rebutted by the person concerned by producing evidence to prove that the allegations contained in the notice were incorrect and that infact no attempt to evade the tax had been m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alty. The authority Delhi Assam Roadways Corporation Limited Hisar v. State of Haryana, (2001) 17 PHT 418 (PandH) = (2001) 123 STC 273 (PandH) relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents in our opinion would have no application to the facts of the present case. Non production of challan duly filled in before an officer checking the goods may be a sufficient reason to believe that the person transporting the goods was attempting to evade the tax due under the Act but that would be only in those cases, where tax is leviable under the provisions of the Act. However, where the sales and purchases were not leviable to tax under the provisions of the Act (as found in this case by the Sales Tax Tribunal), it could not be said that the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
