2014 (3) TMI 81

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: Mr. Jaimin Gandhi AGP For the Respondent : Mr. Apurva N. Mehta ORDER (Per : Honourable Mr. Justice Akil Kureshi) State has preferred these Appeals challenging separate but similar orders passed by the Gujarat Value Added Tax Tribunal, Ahmedabad ["Tribunal" for short]. We may notice the facts from Tax Appeal No. 928 of 2013. In such appeal, the judgment of the Tribunal dated 2nd April....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n or return beyond the prescribed date. The Tribunal relied on its earlier judgment in case of Shree Rubber Industries Limited v. State of Gujarat to come to the conclusion that combined reading of Section 45 (3A) with Section 45(9) of the Act would show that the provision for penalty was not mandatory and the word "shall" contained in subsection (3A) of Section 45 should be read as "may" and resu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hether once the authority decides to impose penalty, it can reduce the same below the minimum prescribed under the statute. If a penalty is not mandatory, for variety of reasons, the authority may chose not to impose the penalty. However, whether mandatory or otherwise, the authority for valid reasons decides to impose penalty, the question would be could such penalty be reduced below the minimum ....