9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation and have not recorded any finding to reject the explanation based on the claim of stock transfer. It also cannot be lost sight of that the assessee is a manufacturer of goods and that against the total stock transfer in excess of ₹ 4,00,00,000/- made during the assessment year in question, only a single transaction of value at ₹ 5.5 lakhs has been doubted solely on account of coloumn no.6 being left blank, though the stock transfer invoice and other documents were accompanying the goods. Normally the proceedings may have been remitted to the Tribunal to pass a fresh order, however, in view of the fact that the appeal is pertaining to A.Y. 2008-09 and the fact that the VAT Act itself has now been repealed and has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of ₹ 4,00,00,000/-, and the finding as to the intention to evade tax and the consequential penalty is grossly perverse? 3. Heard Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agarwal, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Ankur Agarwal, learned counsel for the assessee and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revenue. 4. Learned senior counsel submits that the assessee is a reputed manufacturer of cosmetic goods. During the assessment year in question, amongst others, it had made stock transfer of certain cosmetic goods from its factory at Punjab to its branch at Uttar Pradesh. The transaction for goods i.e. 310 boxes weighing 3720 kg were valued at ₹ 5,40,144/-. These were accompanied with stock trans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case, it has been submitted, there was no intention to evade tax and that conclusion may never have been drawn in light of such facts. 7. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the division bench of this Court in M/s Rama Pulses Vs. State of U.P. Ors., 2009 NTN (Vol.41) 189 and another decision of the learned single judge of this Court in Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P., Lko Vs. Dabur India Ltd. 22 Site-4 Ind. Area Sahibabad, 2014 NTN (Vol.56) 106 . 8. Opposing the revision, learned Standing Counsel would submit that coloumn no. 6 contains the most vital details to establish the bona fides of a valid transaction. Unless the bill number and its date are filled up, it cannot be said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inding to reject the explanation based on the claim of stock transfer. Generalities have crept for into the order of the Tribunal wherein it has dismissed the appeal after observing that after the abolition of the check posts, there is a rampant tendency among dealers not to fill up coloumn no.6. That observation, even if correct, may never have led to rejection of appeal filed by the assessee, inasmuch as the specific explanation had been offered by the assessee claiming the transaction to be one of stock transfer. 11. Then, it also cannot be lost sight of that the assessee is a manufacturer of goods and that against the total stock transfer in excess of ₹ 4,00,00,000/- made during the assessment year in question, on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
