9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... truck was directly sent to Allahabad. The Tribunal has recorded that they were not satisfied with the reply given by the revisionist in this regard. All the documents produced by the revisionist clearly pertain to their transportation from Kushidi (Jharkhand) to Lucknow and there was no amendment in the bilty which could indicate that the goods were to be transported from Lucknow to Allahabad. The Tribunal has held that in exercise of powers under Section 54(1)(14) of the Act, 2008, penalty imposed on the revisionist was just, proper and reasonable. The documents produced by the revisionist were not relied upon by the Tribunal on the ground that the same have been prepared as an after thought. There is always apprehension that in absence of relevant documents the goods can be sold to unregistered dealers and thereby transaction would not be recorded in the books of account and the tax due would also be evaded. As per provisions contained in Section 50 of the Act, 2008, provides for penalty to stem the evasion of tax and to see that all the transactions are duly recorded in the books of account of the assessee which can subsequently be looked into by the taxing authoritie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p holding the penalty imposed upon the revisionist under Section 54(1)(14) of the Act, 2008, pertaining to assessment year 2010-11. 5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the revisionist/assessee is duly registered under the Act, 2008 as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. With regard to the present controversy, it is submitted that the revisionist received purchase order from a firm named M/s Pancham Realcon Pvt. Ltd., A/2, Civil Lines, Tashkand Marg, Allahabad for purchase of Iron Rods (Saria) of various specifications vide purchase order dated 15.01.2011. M/s Pancham Realcon is also a registered dealer duly registered both under the Act, 2008 and the Central Sales Tax Act. In order to filfill the above order, the revisionist placed an order with a manufacturer M/s Kohinoor Steel Pvt. Ltd., Village - Khuchidih, P.S. Chandil, District - Saraikella - Kharsawan, Jharkhand. It has been submitted that M/s Kohinoor Steel Pvt. Ltd. is a dealer registered under the Jharkhand VAT laws and the Central Sales Tax Act and is engaged in the business of manufacture of iron and steel. Against the purchase order placed by the revisionist, M/s Kohinoor S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llahabad the truck was diverted to Allahabad to deliver the said goods. It has further been recorded that the documents have been manufactured which were filed by the revisionist subsequently, do not indicate any transaction with M/s Pancham Realcon Pvt. Ltd., Allahabad and therefore it is clear that the said goods were not meant to be sold at Allahabad. The driver of the vehicle also did not carry any proper documentation for transporting the goods to Allahabad and therefore the first Appellate Authority concluded that levy of penalty and tax on the revisionist was proper and reasonable and therefore rejected the first appeal. 8. Aggrieved by the order of the first Appellate Authority, the revisionist challenged the same before the Tribunal. By means of impugned order dated 24.07.2012, the second appeal of the revisionist has been rejected by the Tribunal. Hence this revision. 9. The Tribunal has recorded that when the vehicle transporting the said goods was detained, no document was produced. It is only after detention memo was issued by the Officer of the Mobile Squad, Form-38, bill, bilty and other documents were produced that too after 12 hours, which gave a reasonable g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty, First Appellate Authority and the Tribunal and submitted that the goods were being transported from Jamshedpur (Jharkhand) to Lucknow (U.P.). The vehicle was detained at Allahabad, at a place which was not on the pre scheduled route. On detention of the said vehicle, the driver was found not be carrying any documents and it is only after detention order was passed, the documents were produced by the revisionist, which pertain to transaction of goods from Jamshedpur (Jharkhand) to Lucknow (U.P.). The bilty, Form-38 and other documents indicated that the goods were being transported from Jamshedpur (Jharkhand) to Lucknow (U.P.). The explanation given by the revisionist that in order to satisfy the order placed by M/s Pancham Realcon Pvt. Ltd., Allahabad, the vehicle was diverted to Allahabad, also is not found to be acceptable for the reason that it was required that the papers were to be amended, so as to indicate that the goods were to be transported from Lucknow to Allahabad or directly from Jamshedpur (Jharkhans) to Allahabad. 12. There is always apprehension that in absence of relevant documents the goods can be sold to unregistered dealers and thereby transaction would n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
