9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orm under the U.P. VAT Act was wrongly or falsely supplied. If any doubt was there with regard to the forms under the C.S.T. Act then the provisions of section 10(a) of the Act would apply and recourse could be had to the remedies under that provision - The tribunal being the last fact finding authority should have passed necessary orders having recorded the findings that the forms were under t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at Heavy Electricals Limited for the assessment year 2008-09 whereby the penalty has been imposed by the assessing authority under section 54(1)(11)(i) of U.P. VAT Act. The matter has been reached upto the tribunal and the tribunal has sent the matter on remand to the assessing authority. The questions of law referred to are as under: 1. Whether no penalty could be legally imposed inasmuch as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment that the department has failed to establish any mens rea on the part of the applicant, which is the condition precedent for imposition of penalty in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hari Oil General Mills vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. reported in 2010 (vol.44) NTN, page 69, penalty ought to have been quashed? 5. Whether the tribunal's o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .S.T. Act and therefore for this wrong declaration, the penalty was liable to be imposed. The language of section 54(1)(11)(i) of the U.P. VAT Act is clear. It contemplates the imposition of a penalty only there a Form under the U.P. VAT Act has been found to be having a false declaration or is wrongful. The Forms supplied by the revisionist were clearly not under the U.P. VAT Act. The alleg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r both sides at length and having perused the material on record, I am of the opinion that the imposition of penalty under section 54(1)(11)(i) of the U.P. VAT Act is not justified in this case at all. 'No useful purpose would be served in remanding the matter to the tribunal and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the remand order is bad. The imposition of penalty is also bad, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
