TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (6) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e finding was affirmed by the first appellate authority as well as the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. Aggrieved by the above order of the Tribunal the assessee filed this revision petition. 2.. The authorities concurrently found the following facts: The Sub-Inspector of Police, Ulikkal, while returning after trial patrol duty on April 20, 1996 at 00.30 hours, at Arabi Road, Karyaparambu junction near the Karnataka State border, intercepted, stopped and examined lorry Nos. KL 11/9408 and KL 13/8817 and mini lorry No. KL 13A/3567 and Gobda jeep No. KL 13B/8324. When the vehicles were examined it was confirmed that 250 bags of cashewnuts were in the above four vehicles and no documents prescribed under the Act and Rules were with the vehicles ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee was that cashewnuts were being loaded in lorry Nos. KL 11/9408 and KL 13/8817 from the business premises of Shri N.P. Ummer for transporting to Quilon. The SubInspector of Police checked these vehicles at 9.00 p.m. on April 20, 1996. At that time mini lorry Nos. KL 13A/3567 and goods jeep No. KL 13B/8324 carrying cashewnuts collected from the cultivators also came there. It was submitted that as soon as lorries are loaded bills will be issued by Shri N.P. Ummer after weighment. It was submitted that two such loads were already despatched on April 20, 1996. The above version was not believed by the departmental authorities and enquiry officer came to the conclusion that these goods were intended for smuggling through the border....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be evaded, as may be estimated by such officer." 4.. The first appellate authority confirmed the findings that the goods were transported with an intention to evade payment of tax. However, first appellate authority noticed that all earlier assessments were accepted and no irregularities were pointed out earlier. Considering the above, maximum penalty was not imposed. Value of the goods involved as per the sale bills produced by the assessee herself is Rs. 6,40,000 (250 bags weighing 80 kg.) and tax due thereon works out to Rs. 44,800. Therefore, instead of charging maximum penalty of double the amount of tax due, the penalty was reduced to Rs. 50,000 as the authority found that that will meet the ends of justice. The Appellate Tribunal co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6 were produced before the authorities on April 22, 1996 much after the incident. That itself show that the delivery notes were prepared after the goods were checked and inspected. The finding that the vehicles were intercepted at night by the police while it was running is a finding of fact entered consecutively by three authorities and no material is produced by the petitioner to enter into a different finding in a revision application where question of law has to be considered. The two delivery notes produced were dated April 22, 1996 and were produced on April 22, 1996 for release of the vehicles after executing bank guarantee as can be seen from annexure "A". 6.. Petitioner submits that it is enough that documents can be produced at t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as she is not the last purchaser in the State. In Sunitha Diesel Sales & Services v. State of Kerala [1996] 102 STC 448 (Ker) and South India Wire Ropes Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1996] 4 KTR 470 it was held by this Court that even though required documents are not there at the time when the vehicles are intercepted and checked, documents can be produced to satisfy the adjudicating authority that there is no attempt to evasion of tax. If it is satisfied that there is no attempt to evade tax, no penalty can be imposed under section 29A. In this case, before the adjudicating authority or before the appellate forum no documents were produced to the satisfaction of the authorities to show that the assessee is not liable to pay tax as she is not ....