https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250042 Penalty for delayed filing of an audit report under section 61(1) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 was held unwarranted where the dealer had paid the tax and the delay was explained by personal hardship, including care for a disabled son. The Tribunal treated the delay as neither deliberate nor intentional and found no lack of bona fides. The High Court held that this discretionary factual assessment did not give rise to any substantial question of law, and it upheld the deletion of penalty in favour of the assessee. en-us Tue, 24 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 31 Jul 2014 15:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250042 Penalty for delayed filing of an audit report under section 61(1) of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 was held unwarranted where the dealer had paid the tax and the delay was explained by personal hardship, including care for a disabled son. The Tribunal treated the delay as neither deliberate nor intentional and found no lack of bona fides. The High Court held that this discretionary factual assessment did not give rise to any substantial question of law, and it upheld the deletion of penalty in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 24 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250042