9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no intention to evade liability of tax. Thus, the revisionist could not be made liable for any penalty. Revision allowed - decided in favor of revisionist. - Trade Tax Revision No. - 40 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 16-7-2019 - Vivek Chaudhary, J. For the Applicant : Mudit Agarwal For the Opposite Party : C.S.C. ORDER VIVEK CHAUDHARY, J. Heard learned counsel for revisionist and the learned standing counsel. Present revision is filed for challenging the order dated 19.7.2013 of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has affirmed the penalty of ₹ 6,38,124/- under Section 15-A (1) (o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 194 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of all the relevant circumstances. Even if a minimum penalty is prescribed, the authority competent to impose the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the breach flows from a bona fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute. Those in charge of the affairs of the Company in failing to register the Company as a dealer acted in the honest and genuine belief that the Company was not a dealer. Gran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee could not succeed in his first appeal against the imposition of the penalty and afterwards in the second appeal wherein the learned Tribunal reduced the amount of penalty only by ₹ 2000/- . After considering the judgment of the Supreme Court, this Court held as under in para-13 of the said judgment:- In view of the admitted facts of the case and the clear finding of facts recorded by the Assessing Authority failure to furnish the form No.31 for the purchase made from outside U.P. By post was merely a technical omission caused by lack of knowledge or negligence but not with any intention to evade tax as the assess had already recorded all the purchases in his account books which were duly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
