TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 986
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellant/assessee belonging to Haryana State has made any attempt to evade the tax under section 51 (6) (b) of the Punjab Value Added Tax Act 2005, which may result in imposition of penalty under section 51(7)(c) of the Act ibid ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the learned Tribunal that Bill and the documents, produced by the driver of the vehicle at the time of checking of the goods, can be destroyed, is patently perverse in nature as after the issuance of advance form VAT-03 at the time of start of the movement of goods from Haryana, the entry cannot remain out of books either of the Haryana dealer or of the purchasin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yana VAT Act"). It is having its oil solvent plant at Nilokheri in District Karnal. In the process, rice bran oil is extracted/manu factured and sold as such. The appellant has substantial turnover on account of this sale upon which necessary tax is being paid in Haryana State. In the normal course of its business, the appellant sold rice bran oil to one M/s. Bathinda Chemicals Limited, Bathinda, a registered dealer under the Punjab VAT Act vide bill dated January 28, 2008 booked with Ahmedgarh Transport Co., Ludhiana, for its transportation from Nilokheri to Bathinda. The statutory declaration required under the Haryana VAT Act in form VAT D3 was also attached with the documents accompanying the goods. Once the entry is made in the books o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in movement to its destination, i.e., Bathinda, it was checked by the Excise and Taxation Officer (Mobile Wing), Bathinda, and a case was made out for violation of section 51(6)(b) of the Punjab VAT Act on the ground that the information had not been generated at the ICC section centre while entering Punjab State. The goods were detained on January 29, 2008 and the detaining officer issued notice for March 31, 2008. The assessee appeared before the Excise and Taxation Officer (ETO) and explained the position regarding the relevant documents. The detaining officer refused to release the goods unless the penalty was paid in cash or bank guarantee equal to 50 per cent of the value of the goods as furnished. The Assistant Excise and Taxation C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the genuineness or otherwise of the aforesaid documents and in such a situation, therefore, injustice has occurred. Support was drawn from the judgment of the apex court in Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. v. Bakhtawar Lal Kailash Chand Arhti [1992] 87 STC 196 (SC) and judgment of this court in Amrit Banaspati Company Ltd. v. State of Punjab [2001] 122 STC 323 (P&H) with the prayer that the matter for cancellation of penalty may be remanded to the Tribunal to decide it afresh after considering the entire material on record. The learned counsel for the Revenue supported the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. In the present case, there is a dispute about verification of documents accompanying the goods. The case of the appellant ....