9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... VATAP No. 134 of 2012 has been filed by the assessee under Section 36 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 11.4.2012 (Annexure A-11) passed by the Haryana Tax Tribunal, Haryana Punjab (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"). The appeal was admitted by this Court vide order dated 28.1.2014 for determination of the following substantial questions of law:- 1. Whether the goods in question purchased from NAFED, a Govt. of India undertaking would have remained unaccounted and there could have been an attempt to evade the tax on the part of the appellant where the payments are made in advance through bank channels? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. Tribunal was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods containing 340 bags from NAFED vide Delivery Order No. 1061 for which the payment was made in advance through bank drafts. The delivery was made by NAFED under gatepass dated 28.1.2003 (Annexure A-1). After the goods were being loaded in vehicle No. HR-47A-1477, the same were weighed from the nearby Dharamkanta vide weighment slip dated 5.2.2004 (Annexure A-2). Since the goods were sold on interstate basis to Calcutta buyers, the appellant was required to issue an invoice and Form ST-38 which could have been issued after the receipt of invoice from the NAFED. The NAFED had issued the invoices at 8.20 PM on 28.1.2003 (Annexure A-3). When the said vehicle was waiting on the roadside for the documents required for carrying the goods, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as there. Relying upon the judgment of this Court in Krish Pack Industries v. State of Punjab (2006) 28 PHT 27 (P&H), the action of the authorities imposing the penalty only on the basis of the statement of the driver was assailed. It was urged by the learned counsel for the appellant-dealer that the transaction had taken place with the NAFED which is a Government organization and reference was made to Annexure A-3 appended with the appeal to show the bonafide of the transaction. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel supported the orders passed by the authorities below and prayed for dismissal of the appeals. 7. The Tribunal had adjudicated primarily by observing that no evidence was produced by the appellant to controvert the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
