2007 (7) TMI 616

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts business the petitioner imports cement from its factory at Raipur to West Bengal by way of stock transfer for the purpose of selling those goods in West Bengal. The goods are brought from the factory by railway. Some of such imported cements are taken delivery by the petitioner at Kalaikunda Railway Station near Kharagpur. Although under the provisions of rule 100 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as, "the VAT Rules") the importer has to present way-bill in form No. 50 in duplicate before taking delivery of the goods from the railway authorities but in practice the way-bills were being produced for endorsement after the goods were taken delivery and transported to the petitioner's godown. The sal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....delivery of the consignment without obtaining endorsement on the way-bill, assured that it would stop such practice and would take delivery of the consignment after presentation of the way-bill in future and requested to endorse the way-bill for the aforesaid consignment. Respondent No. 1 however, did not agree and issued a notice dated September 21, 2006 asking the petitioner to show cause why penalty would not be imposed for infringement of rule 100 of the VAT Rules. The petitioner submitted its reply and explanation to the show-cause notice. By order dated April 24, 2007, the Assistant Commissioner rejected the explanation and imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,36,486. Being aggrieved the petitioner has moved this Tribunal. In the present cas....