9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show cause notice. Once the appellate authority comes to the conclusion that there was a bona fide belief of the assessee then an absolute relief should have been granted. Granting a limited relief only in relation to certain articles, in our considered view, was not appropriate. Therefore, non consideration of the request of the assessee to completely waive the penalty in our considered view is inappropriate. The question is answered, against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. - Commercial Tax Revision No. 16 of 2010 Commercial Tax Revision No. 39 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 18-8-2020 - Hon'ble Ravi Malimath, ACJ. And Hon'ble N.S. Dhanik, J. Shri Mohit Maulekhi, learned brief holder for the State/revisionist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07,760/-. Thereafter, the second appeal was filed before the Commercial Tax, Tribunal. The appeal was dismissed. Hence, the assessee has filed CTR No. 39 of 2009. The revenue has filed CTR No. 16 of 2010 seeking enhancement of penalty than the one which was awarded. 3. Since both the revisions arise out of the very same proceedings, they are both taken up for consideration together. 4. Shri S.K. Posti, learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee, submits that the First Appellate Authority, in the course of considering the appeal of the assessee, came to the conclusion that there was no false representation in issuing the form-C in relation to the purchase of the alleged goods. Therefore, the said provision of law is not applicab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Therefore, it was pleaded that the provision of law does not entail penalty. Section 10(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act reads as follows: Section 10. Penalties-if any person,- (a) xxxx (b) being a registered dealer, falsely represents when purchasing any class of goods that goods of such class are covered by his certificate of registration (c)xxxx (d)xxxx (e)xxxx (f)xxxx he shall be punishable with simple imprisonment which may extend to six months, or with fine or with both; and when the offence is a continuing offence, with a daily fine which may extend to fifty rupees for every day during which the offence continues. 9. Therefore, we are of the view that once the appellate authority comes to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. It is held that the Tribunal was not justified in confirming the penalty order passed by the First Appellate Authority. So far as question no. 2 is concerned, it is held that the Tribunal was not justified in affirming the order of penalty while affirming the finding of fact that the goods purchased against form-C were used according to the provision of Section 8(3)(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act. As regards question no. 3, it is answered by holding that Tribunal was not justified in confirming the penalty order as modified by the First Appellate Authority. 13. In these circumstances, CTR No. 39 of 2009, preferred by the assessee is allowed. The order of the Assessing Officer dated 30.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
