2006 (4) TMI 478

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dealer of M/s. Kinetic company and is involved in the business of sale of scooters and motor cycles manufactured by the said company. Petitioner is a dealer under the Madhya Pradesh Commercial Tax Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as "an Act"). For the year 1999-2000, the assessment was finalised by respondent No. 1, Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax on March 28, 2003 vide order annexur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he petitioner is false and that it has not paid tax by furnishing false information. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for penalty under section 69 of the Act and notices were directed to be issued for penalty under section 69 of the Act. The notices were issued to the petitioner vide annexure P3. In reply to notice under section 69, petitioner contended that since he has filed an appeal ag....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed from payment of tax for its production in the State of Madhya Pradesh and since the vehicles produced by the said firm is sold to the petitioner, the petitioner is not liable to pay the entry tax. The said produced vehicles were entered into the local area, Jabalpur and were liable for the entry tax and affirmed the order imposing penalty under section 69 of the Act.   Counsel for petit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xable event had not occurred earlier and the absence of rubber stamp is deliberate and is not accidental or negligent. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that revisional authority as well as assessing authority has not considered the liability settled by the Full Bench of this court. Counsel for respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the revisional authority was satisfied that non-....