9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1618X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransport. The invoice was of 23.5.2006, the transport was detained at Thrissur less than 70 KMs from the originating point, after four days. There was no explanation offered for the delay. We are of the opinion that the Tribunal erred in accepting the explanation of the assessee that there was no willful omission or deliberate attempt, since the non-declaration is attributable to the ignorance of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RNMENT PLEADER For The RESPONDENT (S) : ADV. SMT. K. LATHA ORDER Vinod Chandran, J. The questions of law arising in the above revision are re-framed as follows:- ( i) Whether the Kerala Value Added Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty imposed on the assessee for transportatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were released. Subsequently in the penal proceedings, ₹ 59,000/- was levied as penalty being twice the amount of tax evaded. The first appellate authority confirmed the same. 3. The Tribunal, according to us, went on a tangent to delete the penalty. The Tribunal noticed two decisions of this Court in Marine Chemicals v. State of Kerala (S.T.No.40/11) and Nirma Consumer Care L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he explanation of the assessee that there was no willful omission or deliberate attempt, since the non-declaration is attributable to the ignorance of the driver. We cannot countenance such a stand taken by the Tribunal. We answer the questions of law against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue and set aside the order of the Tribunal confirming that of the first appellate authority. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
