TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 1688
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....OSHAN For the Petitioner : M/s Kavin Gulati, Sr. Advocate, Anil Tandon & Rahul Saboo, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr. Atanu Banerjee, Sr. S.C.-III, M/s Sumeet Gadodia & Shilpi Sandil, Advocates, Mr. Brij Bihari Sinha, Advocate. ORDER Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner company and learned counsel for the respondent State. 2. The petitioner company is aggrieved by the impugned order of penalty dated 29.1.2016, passed by the respondent No. 3, Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, South Circle, Ranchi Division, Ranchi, whereby penalty of Rs. 10,43,43,655/- was imposed upon the petitioner company, under Section 40(2) of the JVAT Act, for the alleged concealment of purchases made by the company to the tune of Rs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....il Trade', which necessarily indicated that the purchases that were made by the petitioner company were meant for sale. On realising the mistake, an application for amendment of the registration certificate was also filed by the petitioner company, but no order could be passed thereon. In the meantime, the petitioner company purchased the goods worth Rs. 69,56,24,365.36 from outside the State of Jharkhand, which were brought into the State of Jharkhand, by using 356 numbers of Sugam-G challans. As it was detected that these purchases were not shown in the returns filed by the company, accordingly, treating these purchases to be concealed by the company and also treating these purchases to be meant for sale of the goods, the tax on these pur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ported in (1991) 2 SCC 580, laying down the law that once there was no tax liability, there could be no question of penalty or interest on the unpaid amount of tax. 6. In course of arguments on 27.11.2019, in view of the submission that there was no assessment / demand order with respect to the tax liability, learned counsel for the State sought for time in order to ascertain whether in fact any assessment order had been passed or not. Time was allowed to learned counsel for the State and the matter was adjourned. On 2.12.2019, when this matter was again taken up, learned counsel for the State came out with an assessment order dated 28.3.2019, imposing the tax liability upon the petitioner company, with which, prima facie we were not sat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upplementary counter affidavit. A bare perusal of this order shows that all the documents have been considered and revisited by the respondent No. 3, the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, South Circle, Ranchi Division, Ranchi, who has given the finding that the registration of the petitioner company under the JVAT Act had been corrected under the heading 'Power Transmission' with effect from 15.11.2014 itself. The Assessing Authority has also held that the documents clearly showed that the petitioner company was engaged in the business of power transmission and the purchases were also made by the company of the capital goods for the purposes of distribution / generation of electricity, and the goods purchased were never sold. Taking in....