TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (7) TMI 608
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e and the evidence on record, the finding of the Tribunal that the appellants had attempted to evade the tax due under the KGST Act on the transactions in pursuance of which the stocks of rubbers were being transported is correct or sustainable? (ii) Assuming without conceding that the relevant documents and records which constitute the material evidence to substantiate the genuineness of the transaction which occurs and the movement of the goods were not available at the time of checking the vehicles, has not the Tribunal committed a grave error in disregarding such documents when subsequently produced? (iii) Admittedly when the records available at the time of checking clearly indicated that the stocks had been despatched from place....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of branches at different places in India. It has an office at Ernakulam and is an assessee under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 on the files of the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Special Circle, Ernakulam. It is alleged that the company is engaged in the manufacture of tyres and tubes. It used to purchase imported natural rubber from State Trading Corporation of India, Madras. It entered into an agreement with Midas Rubbers Private Limited, Ettumanoor, Kerala for processing of the natural rubber with chemicals. The rubber thus processed is used for manufacturing tyres and tubes at the unit at Balasore, Orissa. According to the assessee, as per its advice State Trading Corporation, Madras d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e endorsement for transport of masticated rubber to Orissa. 3.. It is contended by the assessee that annexure V issued by the Intelligence Officer imposing penalty was issued without appreciating the contentions raised by its representative and without looking into the documents produced. The Intelligence Officer had found that there was wilful attempt to evade the payment of tax and a penalty equal to double the amount of tax attempted to be evaded was imposed in exercise of his powers under section 29(4) of the KGST Act. Aggrieved by the orders imposing penalty the assessee had filed appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as S.T.A. Nos. 592 and 593 of 1993. These appeals were also dismissed under a common order confirmi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....documents referred by the assessee in its petition had been produced before the Intelligence Officer. It is unfortunate that neither the original authority nor the appellate authority had cared to look into those documents before passing an order imposing penalty and before affirming the order. There is also merit in the contention raised by the learned counsel that unless there is material before the authority to show that two truck loads of rubber were purchased by the assessee in Kerala, there is no question of an attempt to evade tax. In view of the fact that rubber during the relevant time was liable to be taxed at the point of last purchase in the State by a dealer who is liable to tax under section 5 the revision-petitioner is fully ....