TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (8) TMI 1025
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see's place. The person in- charge of the goods vehicle had tendered the invoice issued by M/s. Avon Overseas, Kalyani, in favour of the appellant for having effected sales valued at Rs. 5,26,036. The respondent noticed that the said documents has not been tendered at the first entry check-post and held that there was an intention to avoid the tax. Accordingly, a penalty was imposed on the assessee. Aggrieved by the same, an appeal was filed before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, who allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty. Thereafter, the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes initiated suo motu revision against the assessee. By the impugned order, the order of the appellate authority was set aside and the order o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside. He contends that there was no intention to avoid the tax due to the State. Hence, the imposition of penalty is bad in law. He contends that it is for the State to show the loss of revenue to the State. Hence, the revisional power could not be exercised. In support of his contention, he relies on the judgment in the case of Khemka Plyland v. Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Zone II, Bangalore reported in [2003] 129 STC 321 (Karn); [2001] 51 KLJ 26 to contend that when the check-post authorities have not scrutinized the documents, the assessee cannot be found fault with. Sri Shivayogiswamy, AGA, defends the impugned ord....