https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436097 The court dismissed the writ application, upholding the penalty under Section 40(2) of the JVAT Act. The petitioner's delayed filing of the revised return after raising a bill and only following the initiation of penalty proceedings indicated mens rea. The court distinguished the case from precedent, emphasizing the untimely filing of the revised return. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes was deemed justified. en-us Fri, 31 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Apr 2023 08:57:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436097 The court dismissed the writ application, upholding the penalty under Section 40(2) of the JVAT Act. The petitioner's delayed filing of the revised return after raising a bill and only following the initiation of penalty proceedings indicated mens rea. The court distinguished the case from precedent, emphasizing the untimely filing of the revised return. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes was deemed justified. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 31 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436097