2008 (7) TMI 909

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ax Act 1948, the petitioner who is a registered dealer under the U.P. Trade Tax Act has sought to challenge the order dated March 31, 2003 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal in Second Appeal No. 205 of 2001 for the assessment year 1998-99 relating to penalty under section 13A(4) of the Act. The applicant is having its head office at Badaun and branch office at Civil Lines. According to it, it is mai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the applicant by the assessing officer. The explanation furnished in response to the show-cause notice was not found satisfactory and penalty amounting to Rs. 2,21,000 was levied by the assessing officer vide order dated May 31, 1999. Against this order the appeal filed by the applicant was allowed in part by reducing the penalty amount to Rs. 1,48,000 vide order dated November 7, 2000. The said ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....shed by the applicant-dealer that due to human error specially of palledars goods other than the one mentioned in challan were loaded in the truck in question, has not been found acceptable by all the three authorities below. The said finding, thus, is essentially a finding of fact and cannot be interfered with in the present revision. At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant invited a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the goods released by furnishing security without lodging any protest or representation as provided for under the Act itself shows that the applicant had no defence and the finding in this regard by the Tribunal is perfectly justified.   So far as the quantum of penalty is concerned, the Tribunal has not given any reasoning for upholding the quantum as modified by the first appellate autho....