9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 1166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... revision has been filed by the assessee under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2002-03 against the order of the Tribunal dated 28th of March, 2006 by which it has confirmed the penalty imposed on the assessee under Section 15-A(1) (o) of the Act. The questions of law framed are hereunder:- (1) Whether in view of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court int he case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax v. M/s Garg Associates Pvt. Limited, reported in 1993 U.P.T.C. page 79; M/s WIMCO Limited v. Commissioner Sales Tax, reported in 1993 U.P.T.C. page 148, the imposition of penalty is justified ? (4) Whether the applicant has imported the goods as raw material and not meant for resale, the imposition of penalty is justified? Whether the applicant has imported the goods against form 'C' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al have been brought in from Delhi to NOIDA. It was a requirement that the rawmaterial should have been accompanied with Form- 31. It is the assessee's case that he has sent ten Forms-31 in compliance of the purchase order. However, on 29th of January, 2003 the rawmaterial was found to be not supported by any Form-31. 5. The goods was therefore, detained and a show cause notice was issued. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee had along with its reply submitted Form-31 before the passing of seizure order. 9. The Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the Forms-31, which were produced by the assessee were either false or forged or were not answering the description of the goods, which had been brought in, no discrepancy has been found by the Tribunal in its order against Form-31, which was produced before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
