https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157321 Consent recorded before the assessing authority to a proposed penalty under section 45(6) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act was held to extend to the factual basis and quantified levy, so the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to reduce the penalty on the premise that consent was confined to law alone. In contrast, where breach of declaration requirements under section 45(1) was undisputed, the Tribunal's discretionary reduction of penalty was upheld because it acted judicially and no irrelevant consideration or omission of relevant factors was shown. The discussion therefore distinguishes jurisdictional interference with consent-based penalty proceedings from lawful moderation of penalty quantum on judicially exercised discretion. en-us Tue, 02 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Oct 2013 12:03:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157321 Consent recorded before the assessing authority to a proposed penalty under section 45(6) of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act was held to extend to the factual basis and quantified levy, so the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to reduce the penalty on the premise that consent was confined to law alone. In contrast, where breach of declaration requirements under section 45(1) was undisputed, the Tribunal's discretionary reduction of penalty was upheld because it acted judicially and no irrelevant consideration or omission of relevant factors was shown. The discussion therefore distinguishes jurisdictional interference with consent-based penalty proceedings from lawful moderation of penalty quantum on judicially exercised discretion. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 02 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157321