https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164709 The applicant challenged the penalty imposed under section 15A(1)(o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act for the assessment year 2003-04. Despite disclosing imported goods, a penalty was imposed for alleged non-compliance. Various appeal stages ensued, with differing decisions on penalty amount and recovery proceedings. The legal argument focused on the absence of intent to evade tax when goods were disclosed, questioning the imposition of penalties based solely on procedural lapses. The requirement to deposit 5% of the penalty amount for staying recovery was contested and ultimately set aside, leading to the release of the applicant's attached bank account. en-us Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Nov 2014 12:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164709 The applicant challenged the penalty imposed under section 15A(1)(o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act for the assessment year 2003-04. Despite disclosing imported goods, a penalty was imposed for alleged non-compliance. Various appeal stages ensued, with differing decisions on penalty amount and recovery proceedings. The legal argument focused on the absence of intent to evade tax when goods were disclosed, questioning the imposition of penalties based solely on procedural lapses. The requirement to deposit 5% of the penalty amount for staying recovery was contested and ultimately set aside, leading to the release of the applicant's attached bank account. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164709