TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether penalty under section 51(7)(c) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was sustainable when the vehicle carrying goods did not report at the information collection centre and the assessee failed to produce genuine transport documents or prove the transaction.
Analysis: The record showed that the vehicle carrying taxable goods was intercepted after it had bypassed the information collection centre, that the same VAT form, invoice and goods receipt were being reused for transport, and that the driver did not furnish the required documents at the check point. The assessee was given opportunities before the designated officer but failed to establish the genuineness of the transaction. On these facts, the authorities recorded concurrent findings that the movement of goods was part of a device to avoid or evade tax, attracting the penal provision under section 51(7)(c), which authorises penalty where required documents are not furnished with a view to avoid or evade tax due or likely to become due.
Conclusion: The penalty was rightly imposed and the challenge to the concurrent findings failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the evidence shows non-reporting at the check point, absence of proper transport documents, and failure to prove the genuineness of the transaction, a finding of attempt to evade tax under section 51(7)(c) is justified and penalty may be sustained.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
