9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1609X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the officer of the investigation wing intercepted and checked the vehicle and the in-charge of the respondent-assessee provided builty no.6527 dated 3.6.1998 and bill no.282 dated 3.6.1998, which were issued by M/s Jai Timber Traders, Delhi, of Rs. 1,83,169/-. Though the purchaser was shown to be M/s Vikas Carpentry Works, 115A Doctor Colony, Hira Nagar, Jaipur, but was found being unloaded in the premises of M/s Prabhat & Sons, the respondent-assessee. It was noticed that declaration form ST 18-A, which was mandatory, was not found with the vehicle nor produced and consequent to the aforesaid discrepancies and other discrepancies noticed, show cause was issued to the respondent, explanation was filed, but the Assessing Officer was not sati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was not found, and even later-on was not produced and other material placed before the Dy. Commissioner(Appeals) was an afterthought and just to evade the tax, an alleged agreement between the assessee and M/s Vikas Carpentry was filed, which has no basis. She further contended that the impugned order is perverse. 4. Per contra Mr. Gogra, on behalf of the assessee, candidly accepted that in the light of judgment in Bajaj Electricals (supra) the penalty could have been levied on the owner, however, he contended that ample evidence was led on the assessment record as well as the record of the Dy. Commissioner(Appeals), who has gone into the facts as well, therefore, when on the facts penalty has been deleted and being justified, then ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the owner of the goods" on his giving of adequate security. It is the owner (importer) who has to fill in Form ST 18-A. It is the owner who is entitled to seek release under Section 78(4) on giving security. It is the owner who is entitled to hearing under Section 78(5) and, therefore, the expression "person in-charge of the goods" under Section 78(5) would include the owner. Moreover, under Section 78(2) the words used are "person incharge of a vehicle or carrier of goods in movement" whereas the words in Section 78(5) which comes after Sub-section (4) refer to "person in-charge of the goods". The words "in movement" do not find place in Section 78(5) and therefore the expression "person in-charge of goods" under Section 78(5) was wider th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad not filled the particulars in Form ST 18-A) whereas before the Dy. Commissioner(A) a Form was produced purportedly sent to the consignor which was not accepted. According to the Commissioner(A) it was an afterthought. Before the Tax Board it was submitted by the respondent that a blank Form was sent to the consignor. In view of the above prevarication we hold that the Dy. Commissioner(A) was right in holding that all the above excuses are trotted out as an afterthought. Even the production of the Form before the Dy. Commissioner(A) was an afterthought. Under the 1995 Rules, the consignor is required to give the said Form duly filled in when the consignment is ordered. The consignee has to see that the Form is given to the transporter wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
