2015 (12) TMI 1384

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion to pay interest and penalty. However, as far as the taxes are concerned as against the sum determined at Rs,76,73,937/-, the Tribunal brought it down to ₹ 22,59,672/-. The Tribunal has assigned cogent and satisfactory reasons in paragraph 4 of the order under challenge. - No substantial question of law arising for determination and consideration by this Court. We do not see any reason to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... igation Branch, Mumbai, pending the disposal of the first appeal. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax had passed the order for the financial year 1st April, 2008 to 31st March, 2009. Aggrieved thereby, the First Appellate Authority was approached and application for stay of recovery of taxes pending disposal of the first appeal was filed. Dealing with that application and deciding it tha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed. 6. We do not think that any sentence or line in the order of the Tribunal should be read out of context and in isolation. The Tribunal's reasoning is only tentative and prima facie. Neither the Tribunal has termed the transaction as havala or the appellant as a havala trader or dealer. The Tribunal's order does not decide anything finally. There is no apprehension, therefore, that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X