9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used for carrying the goods. Consequently, the Tribunal rightly concurred with the findings recorded by the authorities below and dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant-assessee - penalty upheld - decided against appellant-assessee. - VATAP No. 1 of 2017 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 1-5-2017 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, AND MR. RAMENDRA JAIN, JJ. For The Appellant-Assessee : Mr. G.R Sethi and Mr. Varun Chadha, Advocates Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. The appellant-assessee has filed the instant appeal under Section 68 of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (in short, the Punjab VAT Act) against the order dated 21.10.2016, Annexure A.9, passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh (in short, the Tribunal )in Appeal No. 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utomobiles Private Limited as per their order received on the internet. On 8.10.2008, the company sold one engine of multi-utility vehicle (Rhino) valuing Rs. 2,03,544/- to the same company. Both the sales were on credit against C forms and the payments were received through banks. Due to urgency of purchasing company, the goods covered by both the invoices were dispatched by an hired Innova Car. The driver was entrusted with both the invoices for the goods and form XXXVIII received from the buyer company with the instructions to get the sale invoices recorded at ICC, Shambhu. The driver of the Car being not conversant missed export ICC and reached Toll Tax collection center. At the ICC (Exports), Shambhu there was no erected boom barrie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner (Appeals) (DETC[A]). Vide order dated 30.04.2015, Annexure A.8, the DETC (A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Still not satisfied, the assessee filed an appeal before the Punjab VAT Tribunal. Vide order dated 21.10.2016, Annexure A.9, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal. Hence, the instant appeal by the appellant-company. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant-assessee. 4. A perusal of the order dated 21.10.2016, Annexure A.9, passed by the Value Added Tax Tribunal, Punjab shows that with regard to substantial question No. (a) whether Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner (AETC) ICC (Exports), Shambhu is competent Designated Officer to impose penalty under Section 51 of the Punjab VAT Act, no such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he did not know about the location of the ICC, does not help the case of the appellant as even according to the company, it was not first transaction and even prior to that, they were taking the goods through that way. On perusal of the statement of accounts, it transpires that they passed through that way even on 30.09.2008 and 07.10.2008 and prior to that also, they were frequently passing through the said highway. In these circumstances, the appellant can t be said to have no knowledge of the location of the ICC, the said excuse is nothing but a device to get rid of the charges against him. The intention of the appellant to avoid the tax is further strengthened from the fact that the goods were carried away through a vehicle which was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
