2008 (7) TMI 863

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e as under: "(i) Is the Tribunal correct in holding that the subsequent production of document in the case would not absolve the assessee from the liability? (ii) Whether the Tribunal is justified in restoring the penalty which is solely based on certain technical omissions in preparing the invoices? (iii) Whether the Tribunal is justified in cancelling the first appellate order when there is no valid reason to deviate from the findings of the first appellate authority? (iv) Whether the Tribunal is justified in restoring the penalty imposed by the Intelligence Officer on the basis of mere presumptions? (v) Whether the penalty under section 21A of the KGST Act can be imposed for the technical omissions such as minor variation in the add....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o is in Howarh at Calcutta. He had also stated that because of the inadvertence on the part of the consignor, the proof of the registration certificate of the dealer is not mentioned in the bill. Further he had also produced the records maintained by him in the regular course of his business, and in the books of account it was reflected that the supplies made by the consignor are taken into the books of account. Therefore, he had requested the enquiry officer to drop the proceedings, since there was no attempt to evade payment of tax due to the State. The Intelligence Officer brushing aside the stand of the assessee, has proceeded to convert the security deposit offered by the petitioner into a penalty by his order dated March 30, 2005. I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nce Officer when he made enquiries after the records were transmitted to him by the Intelligence Wing of the department. Having gone through the omission pointed out by the Intelligence Officer while intercepting the goods while they were being transported, in our opinion, the presumption that the Intelligence Officer has drawn is one which cannot be accepted. This aspect of the matter should have been taken note of by the authorities under the Act as well as by the Tribunal. The assessee being aggrieved by the order passed by the Intelligence Officer, Commercial Taxes, Mattancherry had questioned the same before the first appellate authority and in fact the first appellate authority after going through the explanation offered by the asse....