https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397507 Penalty under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was sustained because the accompanying documents did not evidence the transaction to the assessee, and the explanation of imported goods or job work remained unsubstantiated. The goods were moving from Tuglabad to Faridabad, but the documents showed import by another entity, with no document carried by the driver or employee proving a disclosed transfer to the assessee. The VAT D-3 form did not show disclosure of the movement, and the belated challan without the time of removal did not support the claim. The Tribunal's finding was not perverse, and no substantial question of law arose. en-us Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Aug 2020 07:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397507 Penalty under the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was sustained because the accompanying documents did not evidence the transaction to the assessee, and the explanation of imported goods or job work remained unsubstantiated. The goods were moving from Tuglabad to Faridabad, but the documents showed import by another entity, with no document carried by the driver or employee proving a disclosed transfer to the assessee. The VAT D-3 form did not show disclosure of the movement, and the belated challan without the time of removal did not support the claim. The Tribunal's finding was not perverse, and no substantial question of law arose. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397507