Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty under section 15-A(1)(o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was justified where goods were transported without form XXXI under section 28-A, but the transactions were recorded in the books, supported by customs documents, and no intention to evade tax or loss of revenue was found.
Analysis: The revisions arose from penalty orders based on the absence of form XXXI during movement of imported goods. The material on record showed that the goods were duly entered in the assessee's accounts and customs records, and tax had been paid with interest. The Tribunal itself recorded that the department suffered no revenue loss and that there was no intention to evade tax. In such circumstances, the breach was only technical or venial. A penalty for breach of a statutory obligation is not to be imposed as a matter of course, especially where the conduct does not show deliberate defiance, contumacy, dishonesty, or conscious disregard of obligation.
Conclusion: Penalty under section 15-A(1)(o) was not sustainable and was liable to be cancelled in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Penalty for non-production of prescribed import documents is unwarranted where the goods are duly accounted for, tax has been paid, and there is no finding of intent to evade tax or loss of revenue.