9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to as the Act). The seizing authority had imposed a penalty by order dated 27.2.2006 with respect to transaction of transportation of goods that had been stopped for checking on 7.2.2004. It had given rise to the demand of penalty Rs. 7,11,300/-. 2. The present revision has been heard on the following question of law: Whether penalty under Section 30A(4) of the Act could have been imposed on the assessee on mere technical and clerical errors noted by the seizing authority?" 3. Heard Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. Pooja Srivastava, learned counsel for the assessee and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue. 4. The present revision has been heard and decided, at this stage, with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot accounted for, in face of the fact that in the account books of the assessee produced before the assessing officer, no discrepancy was alleged in the invoice. 6. It is his further submission that for the purpose of reaching the conclusion whether the goods had been properly accounted for or not, it is the account books of the assessee that had to be examined, not the goods receipt. Therefore, any discrepancy noted with reference to the goods receipt may be inconsequential when the correct value of the goods was found recorded in the original account books examined before the seizure of goods. With reference to 10 Form 49 and invoices, it has been submitted, those having been produced, no adverse inference could be drawn as those invoice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first place, the penalty order is not based of any reasoning either that the invoices produced by the assessee were not serially numbered, or that, they were not accounted for in the books of account of the assessee, at the relevant time. The assessing authority merely referred to the fact that three columns in Form 49 were not filled up by the assessee and the assessee had not been able to establish what action he had taken against the transporter, for the default committed by the latter, in not filling three columns in Form 49. 10. Once the assessee produced the books of account prior to seizure along with all invoices, it had opened itself to scrutiny by the seizing authority at that stage itself, as to the correctness of the explanati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
