AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 325
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dealer registered under Rajasthan Vat Act as well as the Central Sales Tax Act and is engaged in trading of gram and made inter-state sale with consignee, M/s Mundwala Enterprises at Abohar. The goods from the consignor at Rajasthan were to be unloaded at Godowns taken on lease by consignee, vide lease agreement at Village Kallar Khera and Usman Khera (both villages falling within Tehsil Abohar). This information was also provided to the concerned department, Abohar vide VAT-5 dated 13.08.2009 (A-2) i.e days prior to the movement of consignment from Rajasthan to Punjab. On 19.08.2009, the Excise and Taxation Officer, Bathinda (Mobile Wing) checked the seven trucks loaded with Gram vehicle, which was stationed and was being unloaded i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nation was given as to why proviso of section 51(2) and section 51(4) of the ICC were not complied by making declaration at the ICC. The consignee was that of Abohar and there was no good ground to take Godowns of M/s Radhey Krishna Wheat products (P) Ltd., Kallar Khera and at Usman Khera at a distance of more than 30 Kms. The Designated Officer was of the view that the documents were not genuine and there had been an attempt to evade tax. Penalty of Rs. 11,57,404 was imposed u/s 51(7)(b) of the Punjab VAT Act, vide order dated 03.9.2009 of AETC (MW) Bathinda (A-4). Feeling aggrieved against this order, the appellant preferred an appeal, which was dismissed on 30.03.2010 (A-5). The appellant went in appeal against order dated 30.13.20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The operative part of the judgment reads as under:- "......Only contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the Appellate Authority as well as the Tribunal have not considered the explanation of the petitioner that there was no attempt to evade tax, though entry at ICC had not been made. It is submitted that mere absence of entry at ICC could not be taken as conclusive for imposing penalty. Explanation of the petitioner ought to have been considered not only by the Assessing Authority but also by the Appellate Authority and the Tribunal. In the explanation, it was stated that the consignment was accompanied by proper and genuine documents and no mens rea was made out. Reliance is placed on judgment of this court in Amrit ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under:- "1..............b) Whether it was mandatory on the part of the drivers of the vehicles to voluntarily stop at the ICC and give information of the Inter-State transaction for getting form VAT XXXVI generated and by not doing so, an attempt to evade the tax was made? 4......."The drivers Incharge of the vehicle had GRs and Invoices with them. Goods were to be loaded in the Railway from Dappar but were to go to Dappar by road. All the area from Shahpur to Dappar falls within Punjab. On the invoice, container number and seal used on the container was mentioned. The goods were to go in the same container after those were put on Railway Wagons. CST as applicable had been charged. C forms have also been received. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vade tax on the part of the appellant. In view of the aforesaid documents, no conclusion could be drawn that the declaration was not obtained with a view to evade tax unless the documents were rejected on the ground that they were not genuine. The Tribunal was required to have recorded definite finding whether these documents were genuine or not and thereafter adjudicated the matter....." Reference has further been made to a case of Punjab Wool Syndicate v State of Punjab and anr, 2023 28 PHT 27(P&H). The operative part of the judgment reads as under:- "...It is not the case of the respondents that on 13.07.2006, the appellant did not produce above said invoices. In one of the cases as referred above, even non-appearance before ....