https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434374 Penalty under Section 40(2) of the Jharkhand VAT Act was not sustainable where the assessee had filed a revised return that was accepted in assessment and the facts did not show deliberate concealment or intent to evade tax. The Court treated Section 40(2) as a penal provision aimed at concealment or furnishing incorrect particulars with the requisite mens rea, and held that the case, at most, attracted the default penalty under Section 30(4)(d). The higher penalty was set aside, and the amount already recovered was ordered to be refunded after deduction of the maximum penalty permissible under Section 30(4)(d). en-us Tue, 21 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Feb 2023 08:51:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434374 Penalty under Section 40(2) of the Jharkhand VAT Act was not sustainable where the assessee had filed a revised return that was accepted in assessment and the facts did not show deliberate concealment or intent to evade tax. The Court treated Section 40(2) as a penal provision aimed at concealment or furnishing incorrect particulars with the requisite mens rea, and held that the case, at most, attracted the default penalty under Section 30(4)(d). The higher penalty was set aside, and the amount already recovered was ordered to be refunded after deduction of the maximum penalty permissible under Section 30(4)(d). Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 21 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434374