https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393678 Penalty under Section 54(1)(14) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 could not rest solely on an unfilled column in Form 38. The Court held that the authority had to establish, on relevant material, an intention to evade tax; a blank entry was only a factor from which an adverse inference might be drawn. Because the goods matched the supporting documents, the vehicle carried Form 38, and the Tribunal's finding of no evasion was not shown to be perverse, the penalty was deleted and the revision failed. en-us Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Mar 2020 10:01:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393678 Penalty under Section 54(1)(14) of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 could not rest solely on an unfilled column in Form 38. The Court held that the authority had to establish, on relevant material, an intention to evade tax; a blank entry was only a factor from which an adverse inference might be drawn. Because the goods matched the supporting documents, the vehicle carried Form 38, and the Tribunal's finding of no evasion was not shown to be perverse, the penalty was deleted and the revision failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 10 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393678