https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162671 Penalty under section 13A(4) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was held to depend on seizure of goods under section 13A(1); where no seizure occurred, the statutory basis for penalty proceedings did not arise and the penalty could not be sustained. The Tribunal's acceptance of the dealer's explanation for the bill discrepancy, including its finding that the goods were entered in the books of account, was treated as a factual determination. In the absence of contrary material, the turnover enhancement and consequential penalty were upheld as deleted. en-us Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Mar 2014 14:42:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162671 Penalty under section 13A(4) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 was held to depend on seizure of goods under section 13A(1); where no seizure occurred, the statutory basis for penalty proceedings did not arise and the penalty could not be sustained. The Tribunal's acceptance of the dealer's explanation for the bill discrepancy, including its finding that the goods were entered in the books of account, was treated as a factual determination. In the absence of contrary material, the turnover enhancement and consequential penalty were upheld as deleted. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162671