https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166544 The Tribunal's finding that the movement of goods was a return of rejected material to the original supplier, supported by invoices, purchase bills, a dealer certificate and the vehicle's voluntary reporting at the check-post, was upheld as a factual conclusion based on evidence. The High Court noted that the record showed proper documentation and no attempt to evade tax, and held that a mere assertion that the goods did not tally with the purchase bills did not establish perversity in the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence. The penalty therefore could not be sustained. en-us Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Oct 2014 15:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166544 The Tribunal's finding that the movement of goods was a return of rejected material to the original supplier, supported by invoices, purchase bills, a dealer certificate and the vehicle's voluntary reporting at the check-post, was upheld as a factual conclusion based on evidence. The High Court noted that the record showed proper documentation and no attempt to evade tax, and held that a mere assertion that the goods did not tally with the purchase bills did not establish perversity in the Tribunal's appreciation of evidence. The penalty therefore could not be sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166544