TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1134
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal filed by the revision petitioner against an appellate order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Department of Commercial Taxes, Thrissur was confirmed, thereby the penalty imposed under Section 47(6) of the KVAT Act against the revision petitioner was confirmed. 2. Brief facts involved are as follows:- The Intelligence Inspector, Commercial Taxes, Mattancherry at Aluva had intercepted a vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-45G/851 carrying certain goods consigned by the revision petitioner to three distinct dealers at Kothamangalam, Muvattupuzha and Thodupuzha. The interception was at 15:45 hours (3:45 p.m) on 24.07.2012. The Intelligence Inspector issued a notice under Section 47(2) of the KVAT Act, demanding furnishing of securi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... entered in the books of accounts of the dealer. Therefore it is found that the contention of the dealer cannot be accepted. The specific finding of the Intelligence Officer is that "findings of the Intelligence Inspector, Squad No.-I, Mattanchery is justifiable". Therefore the security deposit of Rs. 67,500/- was directed to be converted into penalty under Section 47(6) of the KVAT Act. 4. Before the first Appellate Authority, the revision petitioner contended that, the goods were loaded in a hired vehicle and the vehicle broke down mid-way and was held up in a workshop for a day and therefore the journey could be proceeded only on the next day. The revision petitioner produced a copy of a Certificate issued by one Basil P.A, who is the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt of tax by using the invoices for multiple transport, is the conclusion arrived. Therefore the orders impugned were upheld. However, the quantum of penalty was limited to equal the amount of suppression sought to be evaded. 6. Main ground on which the impugned orders are assailed is that, the Intelligence Officer has not conducted any proper enquiry as contemplated under Section 47(5) of the KVAT Act. It is pointed out that, the production of entire books of account of the business ought to have been accepted, as a proper discharge of the burden on the revision petitioner inorder to displace the suspicion of attempt at evasion of payment of tax. The Intelligence Officer had converted the security into penalty without arriving at any con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ixed in the invoices. It is pertinent to note that, the address of the consignor is at Muringoor in Thrissur District. The interception is on the next day of the date of the invoices, at a place named at Kuruppampady in Ernakulam District. Question to be examined was, whether the revision petitioner could substantiate before the Enquiry Officer that, there was infact no attempt at evasion of payment of tax due on the goods. If the time of despatch of the consignment was noted in the invoices, the suspecion about multiple transport using the same invoices could have averted. The revision petitioner had produced all the books of accounts before the Enquiry Officer, which include the trade, profit and loss account, balance sheet, stock registe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....quent transport made on the next day using the very same invoices based on which a transport of the goods were already affected on the previous day. Such a verification could have been done by comparing the books of accounts of the consignees in the invoices. The mere allegation that there might have been an attempt of effecting multiple transports using the same invoices, was not established in any manner during the enquiry. It is pertinent to note that, the revision petitioner is not in a position to adduce any negative evidence to discredit such a suspension raised. Therefore it cannot be said that the Officer who conduct the enquiry as contemplated under sub-section (5) of Section 47 has arrived at any clear finding based on any materia....