9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was also different - HELD THAT:- The First Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal have recorded findings of fact that the goods were not found in excess and it was covered by proper and genuine documents. Neither the assessing officer nor the inspecting officer have got examined the quality of goods from an expert nor have physically verified the goods after unloading them. No description was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2008 relating to Assessment Year 2010-11 was imposed by the assessing officer on the ground that on road checking on 17.05.2010 in a truck bearing registration No. HR-55-G/8450, 948 pieces of timber were found being imported by the respondents and on verification, weight of goods was found excess. The assessing officer was of the view that quality of the goods was also different. Penalty of S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5/2011 (2010-11) the Tribunal rejected the appeal by the impugned order dated 15th February, 2014. Aggrieved with this, the applicant has filed this revision. Sri B.K. Pandey, submits that the assessing officer has correctly recorded the finding that goods were found excess in weight, and therefore, penalty was rightly imposed. I have carefully considered the submission of learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
