2011 (8) TMI 1033

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....elivered by RAVI MALIMATH J.-This appeal is by the assessee being aggrieved by the order of the revisional authority restoring the penalty imposed on the assessee. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm engaged in trading of all kinds of flooring items. The goods were sought to be procured from Tamil Nadu in vehicle bearing No. KA01 C 4969. On January 8, 2008 at the check-post, when the vehic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee was heard. By the impugned order, the double penalty as imposed by the assessing authority was reduced to the amount of tax leviable. Accordingly, the order under appeal was set aside and the penalty was modified. Hence the present appeal by the assessee. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the impugned order is bad in law and liable to be set aside. He co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion of the minimal penalty is justified. 5. The citation relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has no application to the facts on hand. In the said case, the documents were produced before the check-post authorities. However, the check-post authorities did not consider the same. It was a case of non-scrutiny of the documents produced. In the instant case, the facts and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s effected from a different destination. Consequently, it was considered that the movement of goods was one without document and hence it was "no document case". The assessing authority imposed double the rate of tax as penalty. In the suo motu revision, the penalty was reduced from double the rate of tax to the rate of tax leviable. On this ground also we do not find any reason to interfere with ....