TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 376
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owing substantial questions of law:- i) Whether production of documents relating to the goods produced after 20 hours of detention is not lawful when as per provisions of Section 51(7)(c) of the Act ibid, the detaining officer is under legal obligation to allow 72 hours to the owner of the goods to prove the genuineness of the transaction before him in his office? ii) Whether the VAT Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of penalty for non reporting at the ICC when in a number of cases it has been held that mere non reporting at ICC is not a good ground for levy of penalty under section 51(7)(c) of the Act ibid unless attempt to evade tax is proved beyond doubt? iii) Whether respondent No.2 was justified to levy a penalty on th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....overtook the vehicle about half a kilometer beyond the ICC and directed the driver to take the vehicle to ICC. The Excise and Taxation Inspector on duty asked the driver to produce bill and GR pertaining to the goods under transport. The driver produced bill No.3650 dated 11.9.2008 for Rs. 5,69,200/- issued by the Delhi dealer and GR No.2338 dated 11.9.2008 of Dashmesh Carriers from Delhi to Kharar. The Taxation Inspector refused to take the documents on record and made out a case that the goods were not covered by any bill of sale or GR as required under section 51(2) of the PVAT Act. The goods were detained by the Excise and Taxation Inspector on duty under section 51(6) (b) of the PVAT Act and notice was issued to the owner for 13.8.2014....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any opportunity to it to produce account books and to prove the genuineness of the transaction. The Tribunal vide order dated 30.3.2015, Annexure A.1 dismissed the appeal on the ground that the documents were furnished 20 hours after detention and no account books were produced. Hence the instant appeal by the appellant-assessee. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant. 4. The solitary issue that arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the assessee was liable for penalty under section 51(7)(c) of the PVAT Act for attempting to evade tax. 5. Concurrent findings have been recorded against the asssessee by the authorities below. After examining the evidence on record and hearing both the sides, it has been catego....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ginal documents handed over to the driver were lost in transit but the record reveals that the appellant had produced the original documents before the Assistant Excise and Taxation Commissioner. Had the documents were lost then the appellant had not produced the original documents and only copies thereof would have been produced. Thus it is established that the appellant has been transporting the goods without the genuine documents and the driver of the appellant try to escape the eyes of ICC but he was apprehended and the goods were detained. If the driver had lost the said documents in transit then he would have immediately informed the appellant and stopped the vehicle but that was not so done. The story set up by the appellant appears ....