TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (7) TMI 627
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts opinion: "(i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal erred in law in holding that penalty is imposable upon the courier of goods/transporter, i.e. [Blue Dart Express (P) Ltd.] when the identity of the sellers and purchasers are known? (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal erred in law in holding, without any documentary evidence on the file, merely on presumption that goods were being loaded from Ambala instead of Ludhiana for evasion of tax? (iii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal erred in law, to confirm the imposition of maximum penalty, without establishing mens rea, for default and ignorance of technical or ve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the same fate. Tribunal dismissed the appeal by recording the following findings: "I have considered the submissions of the parties and have also seen the facts on record. It is an admitted fact that the appellant had shown the goods as coming from Ludhiana to Delhi and were described as hosiery cloth of the value of Rs. 3,50,000. It is also a fact that no ST-39 was produced at the barrier. As per the details of the letter pad, the value of the goods was shown as Rs. 3,50,000 whereas as per the invoice produced at a later stage, it was shown at Rs. 2,75,000 and as per the certificate issued by Punjab barrier, it was shown as Rs. 2,97,981. Even the weight varied as it was shown at 800 kgs. as per the letter pad whereas in the GR it was sho....