9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1605X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contain the particulars as prescribed in Rule 29, which is lacking herein. Admittedly, tax invoice carried by the person in- charge of the goods vehicle in question as found at the time of interception was not in conformity with the provisions prescribed. The goods were moving from Pune to Bangalore without the required documents as contemplated under Section 53(2)(b) of the KVAT Act - Hence, the check post officer was justified in levying penalty. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that no reasons are assigned by the revisional authority while confirming the order of the check post officer setting aside the appellate order is wholly obnoxious and untenable. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - S.T.A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue Added Tax, 2003 (for short, the KVAT Act ) stating that the driver in-charge of the goods vehicle has produced the tax invoice, which reflects the value of the goods, but details of the consignee is not forthcoming. The person in-charge of the goods vehicle appeared and pleaded that the penalty proposed was too heavy, as the goo ds have already suffered tax @ 12.5% at the hands of the seller and requested to reduce the quantum of penal ty. Considering the same, the check-post officer levied penalty of ₹ 1,44,590/- as against the proposal le vied of ₹ 2,16,884/-. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant preferred statutory appeal before the appellate authority. The appellate authority allowed the appeal, against which suo-moto pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the price. In such circumstances, the revisional authority ought not to have interfered with the appellate order. 4. Sri. M. Kumar, learned AGA appearing for the respondent-State supporting the impugned order would contend that in terms of the invoice placed on record before the check-post officer, goods were moving from Pune to Bangalore. The details of the consignee, Greenline, Bangalore was not forthcoming in the invoice. Since the required documents were not produced before the check-post officer, levying of the penalty was legal. However, erroneously the appellate authority has set aside the penalty order. The same being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, revisional authority invoked the provision of Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el. 8. Rule 157 of the KVAT Rules describes the documents to be carried in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 53 of the KVAT Act and the same reads thus: a) delivery note in Form VAT 505, issued by the owner or the consignor of goods, in respect of such goods as may be notified by the Commissioner an where the goods carried as a result of sale, a tax invoice or a bill of sale. a) a tax invoice or a bill of sale where the goods are carried as a result of sale and are not covered by clause (a); and b) a delivery note in Form VAT 505, issued by the owner or consignor of goods of Form VAT 515, issued by the owner or the consignor of goods, who is a dealer permitted to issue such delivery note in Form VAT 515 as may be not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er or his agent. 12. Invoice should mandatorily contain the particulars as prescribed in Rule 29, which is lacking herein. Admittedly, tax invoice carried by the person in- charge of the goods vehicle in question as found at the time of interception was not in conformity with the provisions prescribed. The goods were moving from Pune to Bangalore without the required documents as contemplated under Section 53(2)(b) of the KVAT Act. Hence, the check post officer was justified in levying penalty. However, the appellate authority proceeded to set aside the said order without appreciating the mandatory requirements of KVAT Act and Rules as aforesaid. The same being erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, the revisional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
