2016 (9) TMI 1611

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ARMA For the Appellant : Ms.Kavita Jha, Mr.Shammi Kapoor and Mr.Purva Juneja, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr. Satyakam, Additional Standing counsel, for GMCTD. ORDER 1. The question of law urged by the assessee/Bank in the present case is that sale of "repossessed" cars owned by it, is not subject to VAT levy. It was contended before the Tribunal by the Bank, that Section 8 of the Banki....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....itself was debatable as is evident from the judgment in Citi Bank (supra), and in the absence of clarity, imposition of 200% penalty was not justified and is disproportionate. This court is of the view that imposition of 200% penalty is facially disproportionate. It needs to be recollected that whether sale of repossessed cars in the light of Section 8 of Banking Regulation Act is subject to VAT l....