TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (1) TMI 802
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the case the sales made by the assessee against ST-XXII forms to seven registered purchasing dealers were rightly disallowed under section 5(2)(a)(ii) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948? 2.. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, penalty was leviable under section 10(7) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948?" The facts which are significant to determine the question of law raised are discernible from the orders of the Assessing Authority, Appellate Authority, order dated October 30, 1992 of the Tribunal and the statement of facts. The original assessment for the assessment year 1982-83 in the case was framed by the Assessing Authority, Ludhiana on December 6, 1983 by raising an additional demand of Rs. 1,09,7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asers. The dealer remained unable to produce the account books. On October 22, 1986, he produced cash book and ledger but no purchase and sale bills were produced from which it could not be verified to whom the goods were delivered, whether the sale bills were signed by the purchasing dealer or not and whether the delivery of goods was actually effected or not. The dealer was further confronted with the signatures of Shri Rakesh Singla partner of one of the purchasing dealers, namely, M/s. Rakesh Enterprises, Ludhiana (RC 32100) on STI form which he had filed at the time of grant of registration certificate and the signatures appended by him on ST-XXII declaration form. The signatures of Shri Rakesh Singla, partner, on both the documents di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s were alleged to have been made (i) issued fake declarations (ii) denied sales to them or (iii) did not exist. The appellant has failed to adduce evidence to substantiate its claim during the lengthy proceedings before the lower authorities. I find no force in the argument that the appellant was deprived of the opportunity to cross-examine the buyers by the Assessing Authority. In fact, efforts were made to do so but the buyers were not traceable. In this situation the appellant should have himself made efforts to produce them before the Assessing Authority with its account books to support the claim and get deductions. This was not done apparently because the transactions in all these cases were fake and invalid. ST-XXII forms were procur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... control over a registered purchaser and he has to rely upon the representations made by such a purchaser to him. According to the learned counsel the legal obligation of the seller is to satisfy himself that the purchaser is a registered dealer and the goods purchased are specified in his certificate. He has insisted that there is no other duty cast on the seller. In support of his submission, learned counsel has placed reliance on a judgment of the honourable Supreme Court rendered in the case of State of Madras v. Radio and Electricals Ltd. [1966] 18 STC 222. He has also submitted that facts and circumstances of this case are such that the dealer was entitled to cross-examination and therefore the petitioner was entitled to the benefits ....