https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753759 The HC allowed the appeal and set aside the first appellate court's judgment, restoring the trial court's decree. The appellant was held entitled to refund of penalty amount Rs. 48,432/- with 18% per annum interest from 20.02.1993 till realization. The Commercial Tax Tribunal had found that penalty imposed under Section 31(3) of Bihar Finance Act, 1981 for want of Form 28B was improper as no such form was required for transportation of seized goods. The first appellate court's reversal was deemed based on extraneous facts and conjecture, lacking sound reasoning, as defendants never disputed the penalty deposit during trial. en-us Fri, 23 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jun 2024 07:44:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753759 The HC allowed the appeal and set aside the first appellate court's judgment, restoring the trial court's decree. The appellant was held entitled to refund of penalty amount Rs. 48,432/- with 18% per annum interest from 20.02.1993 till realization. The Commercial Tax Tribunal had found that penalty imposed under Section 31(3) of Bihar Finance Act, 1981 for want of Form 28B was improper as no such form was required for transportation of seized goods. The first appellate court's reversal was deemed based on extraneous facts and conjecture, lacking sound reasoning, as defendants never disputed the penalty deposit during trial. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 23 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753759