https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274762 The Tribunal upheld the penalty for mis-description and tax evasion, concluding that the appellant knowingly attempted to evade tax by concealing true facts and misrepresenting the goods. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose from the findings, affirming the penalty imposed for attempting to evade tax through mis-description and concealment of true facts during import under Section 68(1) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005. en-us Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Sep 2018 05:55:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274762 The Tribunal upheld the penalty for mis-description and tax evasion, concluding that the appellant knowingly attempted to evade tax by concealing true facts and misrepresenting the goods. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial question of law arose from the findings, affirming the penalty imposed for attempting to evade tax through mis-description and concealment of true facts during import under Section 68(1) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274762