<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (12) TMI 1232 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372463</link>
    <description>Penalty for non-production of Form-31 at the entry check post was not sustainable because the record showed accompanying stock transfer documents, including the invoice, lorry receipt and Form D-3, evidencing movement of goods from the Haryana depot to the Ghaziabad depot. Although Section 15A(1)(o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act could apply to a contravention, the material did not contain any finding of a conscious attempt to evade tax, which was necessary for seizure under Section 28A(6). In the absence of recorded intention to evade tax, the penalty could not be maintained merely on the basis of delayed production of Form-31, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2018 07:55:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=548619" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1232 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372463</link>
      <description>Penalty for non-production of Form-31 at the entry check post was not sustainable because the record showed accompanying stock transfer documents, including the invoice, lorry receipt and Form D-3, evidencing movement of goods from the Haryana depot to the Ghaziabad depot. Although Section 15A(1)(o) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act could apply to a contravention, the material did not contain any finding of a conscious attempt to evade tax, which was necessary for seizure under Section 28A(6). In the absence of recorded intention to evade tax, the penalty could not be maintained merely on the basis of delayed production of Form-31, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372463</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>