9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1758X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , whereby penalty imposed under Section 56 (c) of the Act was deposited by the petitioner No. 1 and the vehicle in question was released to petitioner No. 1. Thus, in the present case, when the vehicle belonging to petitioner No. 1 was stopped for checking, it was found that the driver could not produce any bill or receipt qua payment of tax. Proceedings under the Act were initiated and penalty im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arising therefrom. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner has already deposited the penalty as imposed under Section 56(c) of Punjab Value Added Tax, 2005 (for short 'of the Act'). Thereafter, the vehicle of the petitioner was released alongwith goods. Hence, petitioners could not be criminally prosecuted qua the same offence. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, has oppos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as already been deposited by the petitioner No. 1 In these circumstances since in the proceeding under the Act, penalty has already been deposited by petitioner No. 1, owner of the vehicle in question, continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners would be nothing but to abuse of process of law. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 309, dated 16.12.2009, under Section 420, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
