<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2007 (7) TMI 616 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164097</link>
    <description>Penalty for failure to present the way-bill for endorsement before taking delivery of imported goods under Rule 100 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 was held unwarranted where the consignment was accompanied by the requisite way-bill, the dealer produced the documents for endorsement, and the goods were duly recorded in stock. The breach was treated as technical only, with no material showing that the way-bill was obtained after delivery, that the transaction was a device to evade tax, or that the infringement was intentional or mala fide. The penalty order was therefore set aside as mechanically imposed without proper consideration of the record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2014 16:10:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 616 - WEST BENGAL TAXATION TRIBUNAL</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164097</link>
      <description>Penalty for failure to present the way-bill for endorsement before taking delivery of imported goods under Rule 100 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 was held unwarranted where the consignment was accompanied by the requisite way-bill, the dealer produced the documents for endorsement, and the goods were duly recorded in stock. The breach was treated as technical only, with no material showing that the way-bill was obtained after delivery, that the transaction was a device to evade tax, or that the infringement was intentional or mala fide. The penalty order was therefore set aside as mechanically imposed without proper consideration of the record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164097</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>