https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314442 Penalty under Section 40(2) of the Jharkhand VAT Act could not survive after reassessment fixed the petitioner's tax liability at nil. The assessing authority later recorded that the petitioner was engaged in power transmission, that the purchased goods were capital goods for installation and transmission of electricity, and that they were never sold. Once the foundation for treating the purchases as concealed taxable transactions disappeared, the penalty calculated as three times the tax payable became unsustainable. The penalty order, appellate order, and tribunal judgment were set aside, and the statutory deposit was directed to be refunded with statutory interest. en-us Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:44:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314442 Penalty under Section 40(2) of the Jharkhand VAT Act could not survive after reassessment fixed the petitioner's tax liability at nil. The assessing authority later recorded that the petitioner was engaged in power transmission, that the purchased goods were capital goods for installation and transmission of electricity, and that they were never sold. Once the foundation for treating the purchases as concealed taxable transactions disappeared, the penalty calculated as three times the tax payable became unsustainable. The penalty order, appellate order, and tribunal judgment were set aside, and the statutory deposit was directed to be refunded with statutory interest. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314442