https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256372 Interest did not survive where the assessee's available input tax credit was sufficient to offset the additional assessed tax liability, because the levy could not be sustained on the facts found. Penalty was also unwarranted since the governing provision required proof that the dealer acted to evade or avoid payment of tax, and the existence of adequate credit negatived any such inference. The Gujarat HC therefore upheld deletion of both interest and penalty and rejected the challenge to the Tribunal's order. en-us Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Oct 2015 14:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256372 Interest did not survive where the assessee's available input tax credit was sufficient to offset the additional assessed tax liability, because the levy could not be sustained on the facts found. Penalty was also unwarranted since the governing provision required proof that the dealer acted to evade or avoid payment of tax, and the existence of adequate credit negatived any such inference. The Gujarat HC therefore upheld deletion of both interest and penalty and rejected the challenge to the Tribunal's order. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 25 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256372