9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... zure order, documents are produced, no adverse inference can be drawn, but in the case in hand, the petitioner has issued two bills of the same number with correct weight and the same was produced before the authorities below. On the said premise, the penalty and seizure order was not passed, but while rejecting the appeal, an adverse inference has been drawn that the petitioner has issued two tax invoices of the same number. Once the authorities intend to take an adverse view, the petitioner has to be informed and put to notice to rebut the same and therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law - In the instant case, the petitioner was not put to any notice or opportunity being afforded to bring material on record to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner is a Proprietorship concern. In the normal course of its business, on 04.08.2022, the goods were loaded from the business premises of the petitioner for M/s Wave Industries Private Limited, Amroha, along with requisite tax invoice, e-way bill, etc. The goods in transit were intercepted and on physically verification, the weight mentioned in the e-way bill was higher than the actual weight. Thereafter, on 04.08.2022 itself show cause notice was issued and penalty order was passed imposing Rs. 1,70,860/-. Aggrieved against the penalty order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 30.01.2023. Hence, this writ petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to mistake of the Accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y bill. This shows the intention of the petitioner to evade tax and the same is in contravention to the provisions of the Act. He prays for dismissal of the writ petition. 8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. 9. On perusal of the record shows that the goods were moving from Bareilly to Amroha along with tax invoice and e-way bill, GR, etc. On interception, it was found that there was different of weight as mentioned in the e-way bill and actual weighment being undertaken by the authorities and it was found that the weight mentioned in the e-way bill was higher than the actual weight of the goods. If in the e-way bill more weight was there than the actual found, no adverse inference could be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
