2023 (9) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order dated 31.10.2017 passed by Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Mobile Squad, Unit-1, Lucknow whereby tax and penalty has been imposed upon the petitioner and order dated 23.08.2019 passed by Additional Commissioner Grade-2 (Appeal-I), Commercial Tax, Lucknow,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ked goods were supplied through the same invoice and e-way bill. On 31.10.2017, a tax liability and penalty at the rate of 5% totalling Rs. 62,500/- under Section 129(3) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was imposed on the petitioner. After getting the goods released, petitioner had again transported the same to the purchasers. The amount was deposited by the petitioner under protest. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to determine on evidence whether an actual transaction had taken place or not. That would be subject to evidence received by the authority. As such it was open to the seizing authority to make all fact inquiries and ascertain on that basis whether the goods had or had not been transported pursuant to the e-way bills generated on 24.11.2019. Since the petitioner-assessee had pleaded a negative fac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... clearly established that the assessee had made double use of the e-way bills is merely a conclusion drawn bereft of material on record. It is the reason based on facts and evidence found by the assessing authority that has to be examined to test the correctness of the order and not the conclusions, recorded without any material on record." 5. I find the case of the petitioner squarely covered ....